2016 US Presidential Election

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:13 pm UTC

zmic wrote:
Jumble wrote:Loathe the man as I do I have to give him that's clever. Are you known as a borish, arrogant , racist half-wit? Then look good by finding an even bigger borish, arrogant, racist half-wit to stand next to, such as Nigel Farage. BTW, if you guys want to keep him you're welcome to him.


I see no reason to believe that Trump is a racist. I just don't see it.

If you listen to his victory speech, what was so racist about it?


Trump chose Steve Bannon as a major campaign manager AND Steve Bannon might become chief of staff.

The KKK is literally celebrating and Stormfront is quite happy about Trump's victory. Have you even talked to a white-supremacist recently? The internet allows us to talk to White-supremacists quite easily, just go over to Stormfront and talk to them about Trump.

https://www.stormfront.org/forum/t1185758/

Or look at these youtube comments: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TB9qCiwXzI4
Last edited by KnightExemplar on Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:18 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

elasto
Posts: 3757
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby elasto » Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:17 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:That he has surrounded himself with people who supported him isn't surprising.

It absolutely should surprise and disappoint anyone who believed him when he said would 'drain the swamp'. He has appointed elites, corporate lobbyists and global bankers to key positions, as a moment's Googling will tell you.

(I'm sure you knew he was all hot air, but we'll have to see how long it takes for the penny to drop amongst his supporters....)

User avatar
zmic
Posts: 427
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:38 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby zmic » Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:25 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:The KKK is literally celebrating and Stormfront is quite happy about Trump's victory. Have you even talked to a white-supremacist recently? The internet allows us to talk to White-supremacists quite easily, just go over to Stormfront and talk to them about Trump.


The opinions of white suppremacists are credible or even useful now? When did that happen? These people can be pretty deluded, you know.

And you want me to go looking on Stormfront forums? I happily decline. Be careful that you don't catch any fleas.

And what has Steve Bannon to do with Trump being a racist?

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:29 pm UTC

zmic wrote:And what has Steve Bannon to do with Trump being a racist?


Trump picked Steve Bannon to be chief white house strategist. IE: He's a dude who is going to be running the white house.

zmic wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:The KKK is literally celebrating and Stormfront is quite happy about Trump's victory. Have you even talked to a white-supremacist recently? The internet allows us to talk to White-supremacists quite easily, just go over to Stormfront and talk to them about Trump.


The opinions of white suppremacists are credible or even useful now? When did that happen? These people can be pretty deluded, you know.

And you want me to go looking on Stormfront forums? I happily decline. Be careful that you don't catch any fleas.


Yes, I expect you to use the information available on the internet to make an opinion. I don't care where the information is from, its informative. The fact of the matter is that white-supremacists LOVE Trump. And that's a fact you'll have to deal with.

You already are associating with them by voting for a guy they like. Burying your head in the sand and ignoring them doesn't change that fact. And yes, I do seek other opinions on the internet to form my opinion. Learning what others think only improves your viewpoint.

The fact of the matter is: Trump's pick of Steve Bannon is directly catering to his white-supremacist voters. That's why we're calling Trump out on it and calling him racist. But if you refuse to look at what is going on in the white supremacists world, you ain't gonna see what is going on right now. Again, looking up the opinions of white supremacists is as easy as going to Stormfront. Its quite easy to see that Trump's pick of Steve Bannon is catering to the racists in this country.
Last edited by KnightExemplar on Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:34 pm UTC, edited 2 times in total.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Qaanol
The Cheshirest Catamount
Posts: 3069
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 11:55 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Qaanol » Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:33 pm UTC

Liri wrote:Sanders ended up being a spoiler for the youth vote. Not by getting tons of write-ins, but by driving away disillusioned young people. Clinton's share of the youth vote dropped twelve percent from 2008 Obama, not because Trump won a larger raw number than previous Republicans, but because liberal youth just didn't show up to vote at all in the numbers they had for the past two elections.

I’m going to have to set you straight here.

*Hillary Clinton* drove away disillusioned young people. Bernie Sanders would have brought them out. Hillary Clinton drove them away.

The “Democratic” party rigged its primary (as the leaked emails show) in order to nominate someone who voted to invade Iraq, voted for the “Patriot” act, voted to build a barrier on the Mexican border, is financially beholden to Wall Street, Big Pharma, and Saudi Arabia, did not support gay marriage until 10 years after *Dick Cheney*, still opposes legalizing marijuana, was “extremely careless” with classified information, and cites *Henry Kissinger* as a foreign-policy role model.

…and they were somehow surprised that liberals and progressives chose not to vote for that center-right authoritarian Bush-era war-hawk.

She was a terrible candidate with terrible policies, whom all the polls showed doing terribly against every Republican. Meanwhile Bernie Sanders was trouncing the Republicans head-to-head, outperforming Hillary Clinton across the board.

• • •

The DNC bears massive responsibility for the outcome of this election. Not only did they help Hillary Clinton cheat, but they also actively bolstered Donald Trump as a “Pied Piper” in the Republican primary.

Of course the media deserve their share of the blame as well, since they gave Trump something like $3 billion worth of free coverage while suppressing anything about Sanders. Oh, and the leaked emails show several “journalists” were directly collaborating with the Clinton campaign.

Remember, Hillary Clinton had on her side the Democratic Party establishment, the media, the sitting President, her ex-President husband, even the past *Republican* Presidents, and she *still* lost.

She should never have been nominated, and in a fair contest she would not have been.

• • •

Bernie Sanders is immensely popular with young people, with first-time voters, with Independents, with workers in the rust-belt. He inspires enthusiasm and brings out people who were never involved in politics before. All the polls show he would have crushed Trump in a landslide, even winning the state of Georgia.

But the “Democratic” party rigged its primary, and now we all face the consequences.
Last edited by Qaanol on Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:36 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
wee free kings

User avatar
zmic
Posts: 427
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:38 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby zmic » Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:34 pm UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:It seems odd to me that people keep saying this. Stephen Bannon was just the most recent decision Trump has made that indicates he's racist. At what point will people call a spade a spade?


I'll call Trump a racist when I see him do things that are racist.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 2106
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Sableagle » Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:37 pm UTC

Soupspoon wrote:To paraphrase, "Trump means Trump".

And, as with Brexit, it's becoming obvious that this thing has happened without anyone really knowing what they ought to expect from it happening, everyone disagreeing with each other about what their vote for Trump meant and the main pushers of Trump (including Trump) never actually had any plans for what to do if Trump won (whilst Clinton definitely will have had a viable list of staff and appointments at hand, barring particularly unforseen adjustments).
Hmm ... some people pushed for something without knowing what they were talking about or having a plan for what to do next if they got the thing they said they wanted, and now some people are promising it'll all be sorted out, tidied up and coming up roses by Christmas.

It's March 2003 all over again.
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

User avatar
Yakk
Poster with most posts but no title.
Posts: 11128
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 7:27 pm UTC
Location: E pur si muove

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Yakk » Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:41 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
zmic wrote:And what has Steve Bannon to do with Trump being a racist?
Trump picked Steve Bannon to be chief white house strategist. IE: He's a dude who is going to be running the white house.
To be specific, imagine you picked someone who believed that "all asian people should be banned from entry to the country" as your head of immigration policy.

One could reasonably conclude that this might reflect some of your own feelings on the subject.

Now, imagine you pick someone who believes that sort of thing as your top strategist for every policy that comes out of the white house, not just immigration. And that person also vets the schools his kids go to to ensure they don't have "too many Jews" while they are at it... and acts in other deplorable racist ways, and brags about it.

The president's primary ability to act is determined by how he appoints people. You cannot run something as big as a country by yourself. The president's appointments are actions.
The fact of the matter is: Trump's pick of Steve Bannon is directly catering to his white-supremacist voters. That's why we're calling Trump out on it and calling him racist.


zmic wrote:I'll call Trump a racist when I see him do things that are racist.

Ok, what is a racist thing? Can you give examples?

Is calling for a registration of every member of a religion (which happens to be attached to a given population of people often called a race) racist?

Is giving power to someone who is blatantly, proudly racist racist?

Is responding to a question by a black person with a screed about inner cities and black on black crime, when the question had nothing to do with either, racist?

Is saying that someone cannot be an impartial judge in a case because his parents are Mexian racist?

Or is nothing racist, except certain words? Do you have to say "kill everyone of a specific racial group" to be racist? Or is that just locker room talk?

Are you "not racist" until you actually implement a final solution?

Give me actual, concrete examples of what Trump could do that would say "oh, he's being racist".
Last edited by Yakk on Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:43 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision - BR

Last edited by JHVH on Fri Oct 23, 4004 BCE 6:17 pm, edited 6 times in total.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:42 pm UTC

zmic wrote:
Izawwlgood wrote:It seems odd to me that people keep saying this. Stephen Bannon was just the most recent decision Trump has made that indicates he's racist. At what point will people call a spade a spade?


I'll call Trump a racist when I see him do things that are racist.


Like picking Steve Bannon to be white house chief of staff?

Look man: racism isn't some imaginary boogieman that comes out and frightens liberals. Its a movement, and you need to keep tabs on the movement if you wish to understand it. That includes keeping up on who are prominent white-supremacists in this world, and seeing what Trump does with them.
Last edited by KnightExemplar on Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:45 pm UTC, edited 2 times in total.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7368
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby The Great Hippo » Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:43 pm UTC

zmic wrote:The opinions of white suppremacists are credible or even useful now? When did that happen? These people can be pretty deluded, you know.
Maybe, but when the guys who want to break into your home all start grinning the moment they find out who does your locks, you might want to stop and reevaluate.

User avatar
zmic
Posts: 427
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:38 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby zmic » Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:47 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
zmic wrote:
Izawwlgood wrote:It seems odd to me that people keep saying this. Stephen Bannon was just the most recent decision Trump has made that indicates he's racist. At what point will people call a spade a spade?


I'll call Trump a racist when I see him do things that are racist.


Like picking Steve Bannon to be white house chief of staff?


Unless Trump sidelined a more suitable candidate because of his race, I hardly see how picking somebody for a job can be considered a racist act.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7368
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby The Great Hippo » Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:49 pm UTC

zmic wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:
zmic wrote:
Izawwlgood wrote:It seems odd to me that people keep saying this. Stephen Bannon was just the most recent decision Trump has made that indicates he's racist. At what point will people call a spade a spade?


I'll call Trump a racist when I see him do things that are racist.


Like picking Steve Bannon to be white house chief of staff?


Unless Trump sidelined a more suitable candidate because of his race, I hardly see how picking somebody for a job can be considered a racist act.
So, let's figure out how far back we have to go, here:

Do you understand how appointing David Duke to the president's cabinet would be pro-racism?

User avatar
Liri
Healthy non-floating pooper reporting for doodie.
Posts: 1113
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2014 8:11 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Liri » Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:54 pm UTC

Spoiler:
Qaanol wrote:
Liri wrote:Sanders ended up being a spoiler for the youth vote. Not by getting tons of write-ins, but by driving away disillusioned young people. Clinton's share of the youth vote dropped twelve percent from 2008 Obama, not because Trump won a larger raw number than previous Republicans, but because liberal youth just didn't show up to vote at all in the numbers they had for the past two elections.

I’m going to have to set you straight here.

*Hillary Clinton* drove away disillusioned young people. Bernie Sanders would have brought them out. Hillary Clinton drove them away.

The “Democratic” party rigged its primary (as the leaked emails show) in order to nominate someone who voted to invade Iraq, voted for the “Patriot” act, voted to build a barrier on the Mexican border, is financially beholden to Wall Street, Big Pharma, and Saudi Arabia, did not support gay marriage until 10 years after *Dick Cheney*, still opposes legalizing marijuana, was “extremely careless” with classified information, and cites *Henry Kissinger* as a foreign-policy role model.

…and they were somehow surprised that liberals and progressives chose not to vote for that center-right authoritarian Bush-era war-hawk.

She was a terrible candidate with terrible policies, whom all the polls showed doing terribly against every Republican. Meanwhile Bernie Sanders was trouncing the Republicans head-to-head, outperforming Hillary Clinton across the board.

• • •

The DNC bears massive responsibility for the outcome of this election. Not only did they help Hillary Clinton cheat, but they also actively bolstered Donald Trump as a “Pied Piper” in the Republican primary.

Of course the media deserve their share of the blame as well, since they gave Trump something like $3 billion worth of free coverage while suppressing anything about Sanders. Oh, and the leaked emails show several “journalists” were directly collaborating with the Clinton campaign.

Remember, Hillary Clinton had on her side the Democratic Party establishment, the media, the sitting President, her ex-President husband, even the past *Republican* Presidents, and she *still* lost.

She should never have been nominated, and in a fair contest she would not have been.

• • •

Bernie Sanders is immensely popular with young people, with first-time voters, with Independents, with workers in the rust-belt. He inspires enthusiasm and brings out people who were never involved in politics before. All the polls show he would have crushed Trump in a landslide, even winning the state of Georgia.

But the “Democratic” party rigged its primary, and now we all face the consequences.

I don't contest any of that - my point was exactly the same, I just phrased it differently. We were shown a pretty great candidate, then told "nuh-uh, you don't get to have him." End result, potentially even further reduced turnout. I'm not blaming Sanders at all, to be clear.
There's a certain amount of freedom involved in cycling: you're self-propelled and decide exactly where to go. If you see something that catches your eye to the left, you can veer off there, which isn't so easy in a car, and you can't cover as much ground walking.

User avatar
zmic
Posts: 427
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:38 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby zmic » Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:57 pm UTC

The Great Hippo wrote:Do you understand how appointing David Duke to the president's cabinet would be pro-racism?


Only if you would employ him to implement racist policies. Which is not a given.

Giving racist people a good job is one of the best ways to soften their racism. Racists are usually deeply unhappy people. This is one of the reasons why I doubt that Trump is a racist. What does he have to be unhappy about? This guy has seen it all and done it all.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7368
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby The Great Hippo » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:03 pm UTC

zmic wrote:Only if you would employ him to implement racist policies. Which is not a given.
If you don't understand how putting a self-identifying white supremacist in the cabinet of the president of the United States affirms white supremacy, then I'm not sure anyone here can help you understand. You probably won't get much out of this discussion.

EDIT: Re: racism and happiness, there are so many incorrect assumptions in that sentiment that I'm not even sure it's possible to explain to you why you're wrong.

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Lucrece » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:17 pm UTC

Saying a judge is not fit because of perceived nationality is not racist, and neither is hostility to muslims. That's xenophobia, and the label fits him.

But people don't use xenophobe because it doesn't poison the well like the nuclear label of racist does. Racist sticks far more easily and you might as well call someone a child molester when you call them a racist, as the level of moral opprobrium attached to a racist far exceeds several other prejudice labels in the American conscious.

The problem is when you start using racist as an umbrella term when we're not actually talking about race, it cheapens the term. Racism can get taken more seriously when it isn't flung about at every political opponent the Democrats have in any election.

Or in the case of Bernie Sanders where Hillary's campaign cynically used the term bernie bros alongside the BLM interruptions at his rallies to paint an image of Bernie supporters as the detestable straight white male racist side.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:21 pm UTC

zmic wrote:Racists are usually deeply unhappy people.


Are you fucking kidding me? Racists are normal people like you or me. They just have the wrong viewpoint when it comes to African Americans, Asians, or other races.

I dunno what crazy la-la land you live in. But racism doesn't make someone unhappy. Its simply a point of view they hold.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Vahir
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 7:20 pm UTC
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Vahir » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:22 pm UTC

Lucrece wrote:Saying a judge is not fit because of perceived nationality is not racist, and neither is hostility to muslims. That's xenophobia, and the label fits him.

But people don't use xenophobe because it doesn't poison the well like the nuclear label of racist does. Racist sticks far more easily and you might as well call someone a child molester when you call them a racist, as the level of moral opprobrium attached to a racist far exceeds several other prejudice labels in the American conscious.

The problem is when you start using racist as an umbrella term when we're not actually talking about race, it cheapens the term.


Except that xenophobia IS racism. It's the exact same thing.

Okay, not all racists are xenophobic, but xenophobes are by definition racist.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6579
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Thesh » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:22 pm UTC

Trump's entire agenda is about Nationalism - literally nothing about his policy doesn't revolve around Nationalism, and to pick straight up racists for policy advice when your policy is purely about Nationalism is a pretty big giveaway. His policy for dealing with poverty is to whine about black people in inner cities. He was probably the single biggest member of the birther movement. Every single problem the country has, Trump blames on the Chinese, Mexicans, and Muslims.

He has had absolutely nothing bad to say about white men in general, but completely blows up, throwing around insults left and right whenever minorities or women come up. It's pretty fucking clear that Trump is a hardcore, straight-up, old-school racist. Not to mention there is a ton of history of racial discrimination in his businesses. The only thing he could think of to say was "I allowed black people onto my golf course" like he thought he deserved points for that.

I mean, quite literally Trump has two modes: Angry racist and misogynist, and lost moron. If you voted for Trump, you voted for at least one of those - because he has shown you absolutely nothing else to vote for. There is no excuse for Trump - if you voted for him, you voted for hatred, misogyny, and violence (and the spikes in violence against minorities we can see today). The only reason to vote for Trump is contempt of others, because that's literally the core of every single issue that Trump cares about, and because we have seen that he is a complete moron with no understanding of policy or how government works, I can only conclude that if you voted for him then his message of hatred spoke to you, and thus you are a willing culprit in the pain and suffering that will be inflicted on millions during Trump's presidency.

You are the worst kind of human being, and I can only hope that you feel the suffering you are inflicting on others. If only Karma was real.
Last edited by Thesh on Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:24 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7368
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby The Great Hippo » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:24 pm UTC

Lucrece wrote:Saying a judge is not fit because of perceived nationality is not racist, and neither is hostility to muslims. That's xenophobia, and the label fits him.
If you're going to whine over the Mexican judge debacle being called "racist" instead of "xenophobic", you're being pedantic to the point of stupidity. The head of the Republican party used the term "textbook definition of racism" to describe it.

But yeah, probably that was liberals pressuring him into it, right?
Last edited by The Great Hippo on Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:25 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:24 pm UTC

zmic wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:
zmic wrote:
Izawwlgood wrote:It seems odd to me that people keep saying this. Stephen Bannon was just the most recent decision Trump has made that indicates he's racist. At what point will people call a spade a spade?


I'll call Trump a racist when I see him do things that are racist.


Like picking Steve Bannon to be white house chief of staff?


Unless Trump sidelined a more suitable candidate because of his race, I hardly see how picking somebody for a job can be considered a racist act.


What about a Muslim Registry, because when we interned Japanese during WW2 it was such a good idea?

I guess that's religionist, instead of racist though. But its certainly within the spirit of the white-nationalist movement.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Vahir
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 7:20 pm UTC
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Vahir » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:26 pm UTC

Qaanol wrote:But the “Democratic” party rigged its primary, and now we all face the consequences.


The primary wasn't rigged. It was tilted in Clintons favor, for sure, but at the end of the day she won the nomination because more people picked her. Clinton and the establishment DNC make for convenient scapegoats, but you're just avoiding the issue of everyone who wholeheartedly supported Clinton from the beginning if you do that.
Last edited by Vahir on Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:30 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Lucrece » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:29 pm UTC

Vahir wrote:
Lucrece wrote:Saying a judge is not fit because of perceived nationality is not racist, and neither is hostility to muslims. That's xenophobia, and the label fits him.

But people don't use xenophobe because it doesn't poison the well like the nuclear label of racist does. Racist sticks far more easily and you might as well call someone a child molester when you call them a racist, as the level of moral opprobrium attached to a racist far exceeds several other prejudice labels in the American conscious.

The problem is when you start using racist as an umbrella term when we're not actually talking about race, it cheapens the term.


Except that xenophobia IS racism. It's the exact same thing.

Okay, not all racists are xenophobic, but xenophobes are by definition racist.



Not really? In what way is being xenophobic to Italians or Poles as an Irish American remotely racist? The Mexican judge he was criticizing was white.

Image

Gonzalo Curiel. Trump didn't mention a specific ban against mestizos or mulatto Mexicans. He didn't make an exception for the millions of white Muslims coming from abroad. His whole beef was with a religion. He didn't say he'd bar Coptic Christians from coming to the US.

His prejudice was against a culture in those cases, not a skin pigment or epicanthic fold.

That does not absolve him from being charged as a racist in instances where the label does fit, but let's not get careless with the use of a label.
Last edited by Lucrece on Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:33 pm UTC, edited 2 times in total.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

elasto
Posts: 3757
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby elasto » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:31 pm UTC

Lucrece wrote:Saying a judge is not fit because of perceived nationality is not racist, and neither is hostility to muslims. That's xenophobia, and the label fits him.

Huh? Xenophobia is fear of foreigners. If the judge was of New Zealand descent, Trump wouldn't have slandered him. He did it because he was a specific kind of foreigner. Which, as the Republican leadership admitted, is textbook racism.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6579
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Thesh » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:32 pm UTC

Lucrece wrote:Not really? In what way is being xenophobic to Italians or Poles as an Irish American remotely racist? The Mexican judge he was criticizing was white.


Exactly. How is saying "I don't want you in my country because of your ethnicity" remotely racist?
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
Vahir
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 7:20 pm UTC
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Vahir » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:32 pm UTC

Lucrece wrote:Not really? In what way is being xenophobic to Italians or Poles as an Irish American remotely racist? The Mexican judge he was criticizing was white.

Image

Gonzalo Curiel. Trump didn't mention a specific ban against mestizos or mulatto Mexicans. He didn't make an exception for the millions of white Muslims coming from abroad. His whole beef was with a religion. He didn't say he'd bar Coptic Christians from coming to the US.


So racism is skin color now? The nazis (I'll flogg myself for the Godwin) were 100%, without a doubt racist, everyone agrees on that, and yet germans and slavs are both white peoples. Take a slav and a german and you'd be hard pressed to tell any difference.

Xenophobia is just racism under a veneer of civility.

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 8533
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Zohar » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:34 pm UTC

Are you really arguing whether being bigoted against a specific nationality counts as being racist or not? Are you so scared of using the word "racist" and so willing to apply the label "hateful bigot" instead?
Mighty Jalapeno: "See, Zohar agrees, and he's nice to people."
SecondTalon: "Still better looking than Jesus."

Not how I say my name

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Lucrece » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:35 pm UTC

Vahir wrote:
Lucrece wrote:Not really? In what way is being xenophobic to Italians or Poles as an Irish American remotely racist? The Mexican judge he was criticizing was white.

Image

Gonzalo Curiel. Trump didn't mention a specific ban against mestizos or mulatto Mexicans. He didn't make an exception for the millions of white Muslims coming from abroad. His whole beef was with a religion. He didn't say he'd bar Coptic Christians from coming to the US.


So racism is skin color now? The nazis (I'll flogg myself for the Godwin) were 100%, without a doubt racist, everyone agrees on that, and yet germans and slavs are both white peoples. Take a slav and a german and you'd be hard pressed to tell any difference.

Xenophobia is just racism under a veneer of civility.



Uh, yeah. Unless you're suggesting the US census stopped defining race under those terms. The Germans were anti-semites and xenophobes AND racists. Pointless example there.

Zohar wrote:Are you really arguing whether being bigoted against a specific nationality counts as being racist or not? Are you so scared of using the word "racist" and so willing to apply the label "hateful bigot" instead?



Yes, because nationality is not a race, for fuck's sake. A country's people are not monolith. Mexicans are not a single race. They are white, Asian, mulatto, mestizo, black, and even of multiple racial mixes (although admittedly sizable share of the population is a combination of mestizos and whites).

Different words to describe different things exist for a reason. Use them. There's absolutely nothing wrong with xenophobe, it's been in existence for quite a while and is perfectly descriptive of a particular type of prejudice. Maybe I ought to start calling sexists and homophobes racists as well if I don't care about important distinctions.
Last edited by Lucrece on Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:40 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

User avatar
Vahir
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 7:20 pm UTC
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Vahir » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:38 pm UTC

"My arbitrary designations for groups of people are different than their arbitrary designations. So I'm not the same kind of bigot as them, see?"

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7368
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby The Great Hippo » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:39 pm UTC

Lucrece, you seem to think the lesson from the boy who cried wolf is that we should never, ever cry wolf. But the actual lesson is that you should only cry wolf when there's an actual wolf.

Are you seriously going to try and argue that a man who claims a judge can't handle his case because he's "a Mexican" isn't racist? It wouldn't even matter if he had zero Mexican heritage; just claiming Mexicans can't handle this case is inherently racist.
Lucrece wrote:Yes, because nationality is not a race, for fuck's sake. A country's people are not monolith.
Yes. Which is why reducing them to a monolith -- like Trump did -- *is racist*.

Are we seriously having this discussion with you?

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6579
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Thesh » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:39 pm UTC

I keep hearing that argument ("ethnicity is not race!"), and I'm not sure what part makes it better, or different in any way. I mean, literally you are arguing whether the etymology of a word supports its common usage, while implying that that makes the common usage wrong (turns out, it doesn't). Mostly it comes in the form "I'm not a racist, my hatred for people is based on where they live or certain genetic traits. Does it happen to include all non-white people? Sure, but I also hate some white people, so I'm not a racist."
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

elasto
Posts: 3757
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby elasto » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:40 pm UTC

Lucrece wrote:A country's people are not monolith.

Huh. So you see that, yet you don't condemn him for not seeing that?

(Racism is bad because it negatively stereotypes individuals based on an arbitrary attribute. If you want to call it 'countryism' rather than 'racism' fine, but it's bad for the same reason racism is bad, so why the hair-splitting?)

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Lucrece » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:45 pm UTC

The Great Hippo wrote:Lucrece, you seem to think the lesson from the boy who cried wolf is that we should never, ever cry wolf. But the actual lesson is that you should only cry wolf when there's an actual wolf.

Are you seriously going to try and argue that a man who claims a judge can't handle his case because he's "a Mexican" isn't racist? It wouldn't even matter if he had zero Mexican heritage; just claiming Mexicans can't handle this case is inherently racist.
Lucrece wrote:Yes, because nationality is not a race, for fuck's sake. A country's people are not monolith.
Yes. Which is why reducing them to a monolith -- like Trump did -- *is racist*.

Are we seriously having this discussion with you?



No, I don't seriously want to have this discussion with you. Feel free to call the cow a unicorn if it makes you feel any better.

I'm getting swamped with Godwins, and now strawmans that my position is that Trump shouldn't be called a bigot and that I have issues calling him a racist when I just said there are still plenty of reasons to call him a racist, but prejudice against religion or nationality is not it.

It's impossible to argue against inaccurate criticism of Trump in this forum without being accused of wanting to launch the clown-elect into sainthood or shield him from deserved criticism.

elasto wrote:
Lucrece wrote:A country's people are not monolith.

Huh. So you see that, yet you don't condemn him for not seeing that?

(Racism is bad because it negatively stereotypes individuals based on an arbitrary attribute. If you want to call it 'countryism' rather than 'racism' fine, but it's bad for the same reason racism is bad, so why the hair-splitting?)


What the hell do you think "xenophobe" means, or is this word where you come from somehow a compliment? I already condemned him, yet all the reaction I'm getting is as if I'm actually defending his views.
Last edited by Lucrece on Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:53 pm UTC, edited 3 times in total.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby morriswalters » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:46 pm UTC

natraj wrote:you know this doesn't mean trump isn't racist, right, it just means other politicians are also often racist.
Yes.
Izawwlgood wrote:It seems odd to me that people keep saying this. Stephen Bannon was just the most recent decision Trump has made that indicates he's racist. At what point will people call a spade a spade?

I have a tentative opinion now, what I reserved was my final conclusion. Which you would know if you had really read what I posted.

Calling him a racist makes you feel better, I get that. But for the next four years he is President. Racist or not. What I want to see is what he does with it.
Qaanol wrote:All the polls show he would have crushed Trump in a landslide, even winning the state of Georgia.
There is one fact at your command. Sanders didn't win the primary. Everything else is magical thinking.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:46 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
zmic wrote:And what has Steve Bannon to do with Trump being a racist?
Trump picked Steve Bannon to be chief white house strategist. IE: He's a dude who is going to be running the white house.


Eh, not entirely. It's an advisory position. An important advisory position, to be sure, but let's not oversell it. With the exception of Rove, I don't think the position has been historically all that critical. They get access, and they give advice, but they don't really run everything.

The Great Hippo wrote:
zmic wrote:Only if you would employ him to implement racist policies. Which is not a given.
If you don't understand how putting a self-identifying white supremacist in the cabinet of the president of the United States affirms white supremacy, then I'm not sure anyone here can help you understand. You probably won't get much out of this discussion.

EDIT: Re: racism and happiness, there are so many incorrect assumptions in that sentiment that I'm not even sure it's possible to explain to you why you're wrong.


Where has he self identified as a white supremacist?

The Great Hippo wrote:
Lucrece wrote:Saying a judge is not fit because of perceived nationality is not racist, and neither is hostility to muslims. That's xenophobia, and the label fits him.
If you're going to whine over the Mexican judge debacle being called "racist" instead of "xenophobic", you're being pedantic to the point of stupidity. The head of the Republican party used the term "textbook definition of racism" to describe it.

But yeah, probably that was liberals pressuring him into it, right?


I believe the point is that it was nationalistic.

Which, technically, it was. But if we want to describe Trump has racist, it doesn't take a great deal to get there.

Lucrece wrote:Not really? In what way is being xenophobic to Italians or Poles as an Irish American remotely racist? The Mexican judge he was criticizing was white.


Race isn't color. You can totally be racist against, say, the Irish. Even if you happen to be pretty similar looking. There's actually a solid history of that.

Nobody is immune to racism because of what they look like. It's a human failing, not one specific to any given look.

Zamfir wrote:There is a "dog that didn't bark" effect here. It's hardly surprising that Trump did well among a group that targeted most directly. He promised to be their champion, many believed him. Or at the least, they were willing to give him a chance. Not much of a mystery there.

The surprising part was how this didn't cost him much votes among other groups. That's the crucial part, I think.


Agreed. I believe Democrats counted on his presentation, etc costing him heavily with minorities, women, and other similar demographics. They expected him to flame out and his campaign to explode because of it. It didn't. Since that's the surprising part, that's really the best part to learn from.

The "burnout, because labels like racism have been overused" is one explanation. Another is rage. But rage probably doesn't explain literally everyone. Plenty of people voted perfectly calmly. Not sure what other explanations are out there yet, but it *is* a significant difference between expectations and reality.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:49 pm UTC

Lucrece wrote:No, I don't seriously want to have this discussion with you. Feel free to call the cow a unicorn if it makes you feel any better.

I'm getting swamped with Godwins, and now strawmans that my position is that Trump shouldn't be called a bigot and that I have issues calling him a racist when I just said there are still plenty of reasons to call him a racist, but prejudice against religion or nationality is not it.


I actually agree with your viewpoint Lucrece.

Trump has made plenty of racist moves, there's no need to focus on just one or two. I do think that the Judge Curiel thing isn't exactly the best example of racism, and that better examples of pure racism do exist. Believe it or not, Trump was quite specific on calling out Curiel's heritage and trying not to be racist about the whole thing. (IE: I'm for the Wall and he's clearly against it.)

Trump made a lot of racist-sounding comments during the incident, but its difficult for me to say that Trump meant it that way.

---------

The Muslim Ban and Muslim Registry are not "racist" technically... because he's discriminating on Religion... not really race. But I think those policies are far more indicative of Trump's racist viewpoints.
Last edited by KnightExemplar on Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:50 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Vahir
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 7:20 pm UTC
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Vahir » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:50 pm UTC

It only counts as a Godwin if you compare the other person to Nazis, you know. You're allowed to bring them up as an analogy if it's relevant.

And one reference to that does not 'getting swamped" make.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7368
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby The Great Hippo » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:50 pm UTC

Lucrece wrote:It's impossible to argue against inaccurate criticism of Trump in this forum without being accused of wanting to launch the clown-elect into sainthood or shield him from deserved criticism.
No, I think the problem here is that it's impossible for you to be wrong.

But by all means, continue to mischaracterize everyone who disagrees with you.
Tyndmyr wrote:Where has he self identified as a white supremacist?
I was talking about David Duke. Who I'm pretty sure literally calls himself a white supremacist.

User avatar
Vahir
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 7:20 pm UTC
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Vahir » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:54 pm UTC

Lucrece wrote:I'm getting swamped with Godwins, and now strawman


Then three lines under

Lucrece wrote:It's impossible to argue against inaccurate criticism of Trump in this forum without being accused of wanting to launch the clown-elect into sainthood or shield him from deserved criticism.


Look at that glass house you've got there. It'd be a shame if something were to... happen to it.

User avatar
zmic
Posts: 427
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:38 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby zmic » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:55 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:What about a Muslim Registry, because when we interned Japanese during WW2 it was such a good idea?

I guess that's religionist, instead of racist though. But its certainly within the spirit of the white-nationalist movement.


Do you honestly believe there isn't a database yet with every single foreign Muslim currently residing in the USA?

It's the Mexican wall and the expulsion of illegal immigrants all over again. All things that Trump boasts of that have already been done by Mr. Obama, the great president of Hope and Change.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests