Trump's position on the far right

[fides' Jack]

46 minutes ago, Peace said:

And what if that "cultural perspective" is racist?

Alright man how do you defend this as not being racist? The full video is presented here so you can't pretend that it was manipulated.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDxlMelzl10

Tepper flat out asks Trump if the reason why he thinks the judge is biased is because of his Mexican ancestry. Trump flat out says "Yes."

If you say that a judge is incapable of handing out an unbiased ruling (a.k.a. doing his job) because of his racial background - in what world is that not racist?

Admitting bias is not the same as racism.  Unless you use the "new definition" above. 

Secondly, that's not what he asked Trump.  Watch it again, he didn't ask Trump if he thinks the judge is biased because of his Mexican ancestry, he asked Trump if he thinks there's a conflict of interest because of his Mexican ancestry.  The second doesn't automatically assume the first.

But of course you'll see this explanation as just defending him for the sake of him - and I do admit I'm biased toward defending him against charges of racism.

If you watch the whole video it's not clear either way.  The guy keeps asking him, "What does that have to do with his Mexican heritage?"  And he keeps saying, "I'm telling you what it has to do with it - this judge has been making bad ruling after bad ruling, this case should have been thrown out years ago, the previous judge would have thrown it out", etc...  It doesn't appear that he has an issue with Mexicans as much as he thinks this one judge is out to cause him trouble.

Quote

If you say that a judge is incapable of handing out an unbiased ruling (a.k.a. doing his job) because of his racial background - in what world is that not racist?

If one thing is clear from this video, it's that he's not claiming any judge is incapable of handing out an unbiased ruling, he's saying that this judge is incapable of handing out an unbiased ruling.  And he thought it was because the guy doesn't like the fact that he's building a wall.  It seems like politics more than racism.

I'll admit on the outset it's poor wording, and does sound a bit racist at first.  The more I listen, the less racist is sounds.  I don't know though.  I will say this - even though it's not clear either way, it's the best evidence that I've seen for him being racist.  Unfortunately, that's not saying much.

Edited October 16, 2020 by fides' Jack

[Anomaly]

47 minutes ago, Peace said:

And what if that "cultural perspective" is racist?

Alright man how do you defend this as not being racist? The full video is presented here so you can't pretend that it was manipulated.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDxlMelzl10

Tepper flat out asks Trump if the reason why he thinks the judge is biased is because of his Mexican ancestry. Trump flat out says "Yes."

If you say that a judge is incapable of handing out an unbiased ruling (a.k.a. doing his job) because of his racial background - in what world is that not racist?

I did not watch the video.  However, based on the literally hundreds of Mexicans I’ve worked with or are friends with or family have dated, I laughed at the idea of a Mexican “race”.   How Spanish, indigenous native, Anglo, or other is this Mexican?

Or does this “Mexican” simply doesn’t like the US dictating to the nation of his cultural identity?

[Peace]

41 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

Admitting bias is not the same as racism.  Unless you use the "new definition" above. 

Secondly, that's not what he asked Trump.  Watch it again, he didn't ask Trump if he thinks the judge is biased because of his Mexican ancestry, he asked Trump if he thinks there's a conflict of interest because of his Mexican ancestry.  The second doesn't automatically assume the first.

But of course you'll see this explanation as just defending him for the sake of him - and I do admit I'm biased toward defending him against charges of racism.

If you watch the whole video it's not clear either way.  The guy keeps asking him, "What does that have to do with his Mexican heritage?"  And he keeps saying, "I'm telling you what it has to do with it - this judge has been making bad ruling after bad ruling, this case should have been thrown out years ago, the previous judge would have thrown it out", etc...  It doesn't appear that he has an issue with Mexicans as much as he thinks this one judge is out to cause him trouble.

If one thing is clear from this video, it's that he's not claiming any judge is incapable of handing out an unbiased ruling, he's saying that this judge is incapable of handing out an unbiased ruling.  And he thought it was because the guy doesn't like the fact that he's building a wall.  It seems like politics more than racism.

I'll admit on the outset it's poor wording, and does sound a bit racist at first.  The more I listen, the less racist is sounds.  I don't know though.  I will say this - even though it's not clear either way, it's the best evidence that I've seen for him being racist.  Unfortunately, that's not saying much.

I think you are being willfully blind.

Seriously, I think the tape has to say "I hate n*****s and I want all of them to die" for you to admit that something is racist. If it states anything less than that, you will have an excuse ready, will you not?

[Peace]

1 hour ago, Peace said:

I think you are being willfully blind.

Seriously, I think the tape has to say "I hate n*****s and I want all of them to die" for you to admit that something is racist. If it states anything less than that, you will have an excuse ready, will you not?

OK I'll admit that was uncharitable. I apologize.

It does seem like a whole lot of explaining though man. It kind of seems like you have some personal interest or emotional attachment to the man, which makes your default mode to explain away his bad conduct. . .

[Anomaly]

Based on my respect for your normally balanced and insightful responses, I’m going to back off and think about this.  Whether I think it’s racist or not, it’s evoking a pretty strong response from someone who’s not typically irrational.   So of course there’s something to think about on my end. 

Thats what a couple of beers are for.  Cheers 

[Peace]

45 minutes ago, Anomaly said:

Based on my respect for your normally balanced and insightful responses, I’m going to back off and think about this.  Whether I think it’s racist or not, it’s evoking a pretty strong response from someone who’s not typically irrational.   So of course there’s something to think about on my end. 

Thats what a couple of beers are for.  Cheers 

Well the question remains I think. I honestly can't think of anything that would persuade him that Trump is racist, other than a tape that literally says "I hate all n*****s". 

If that tape is not required, I would be interested to hear exactly what type of information would be the "clear evidence" of racism that we apparently need to have. If not a tape that states "I hate all n*****s" what else could suffice? A video of Trump burning a cross on someone's lawn, perhaps? A picture of him planting a bomb in a church? If not this, then what else would be enough?

I doubt anything, which is exactly why I didn't want to get into attempting to prove it in the first place.

Edited October 17, 2020 by Peace

[fides' Jack]

Finally getting back to this.  

Yes, I think there's an emotional attachment - both on my end and yours - in this argument.

What would it take for me?  If you found an audio sample or video sample or just a confirmed text sample of a derogatory remark that he made when he thought he wasn't being recorded.  That's all it would take.  And it should be pretty simple.  They have tons of these for Biden (for him there are tons of things he's said in public).  They have a bunch for Hillary.  There are a couple that I've seen for Kamala.  And not just hearsay, but something that can be confirmed as actually coming from him.

The problem is that I don't think you can even find that.  He was loved by the left, and by minorities, until 2016.  And he loved them because they loved him.  And that was enough for him because he's one of the single most egotistical people on the planet.

Alternatively, if you can find me a policy that he's pushed for that's actually racist - and not just construed that way by the racist left, who want to hide their own agenda.  Then I'll accept that he's racist.

On 10/16/2020 at 5:41 PM, Peace said:

It does seem like a whole lot of explaining though man.

I tend to be overly verbose.  I think while I write, so I write a lot.

[fides' Jack]

On 10/16/2020 at 5:41 PM, Peace said:

OK I'll admit that was uncharitable. I apologize.

Hey, you don't have to apologize.  Actually, I didn't think it was uncharitable when I read it.

You're obviously passionate about this subject, and most likely there is some truth to your side that you see very clearly.  I'd like to discover what that truth is, but I don't think it can be found by blatant accusations of racism (especially in the current religious/political atmosphere).

Let me say one last thing: I was VERY much against Trump in 2016.  I disliked him on a personal level.  I disliked him on a political level.  I disliked the way he looked.  I disliked his arrogance.  But I never hated him.  The single most significant factor that has made me change my mind on him was the position that the left took on him.  They don't just dislike him.  They HATE him.  It's pure hatred and vitriol, and that level of hatred doesn't just happen with people.  It's clearly demonic.  The left is possessed, and if demons hate Trump that much, there's gotta be something good about him. 

Hatred towards a person can never, ever come from God, or anything holy.

So ask yourself, do you dislike him, or do you hate him?  

[Peace]

17 hours ago, fides' Jack said:

Finally getting back to this.  

Yes, I think there's an emotional attachment - both on my end and yours - in this argument.

What would it take for me?  If you found an audio sample or video sample or just a confirmed text sample of a derogatory remark that he made when he thought he wasn't being recorded.  That's all it would take.  And it should be pretty simple.  They have tons of these for Biden (for him there are tons of things he's said in public).  They have a bunch for Hillary.  There are a couple that I've seen for Kamala.  And not just hearsay, but something that can be confirmed as actually coming from him.

OK so it would take a tape of Trump using the N-word or calling black folks "monkeys" like they caught Reagan. That's actually what I suspected. "Unless I have a tape of Trump using the N-word, I will not believe." Why didn't you just say that at the start? The whole discussion could have been avoided, because obviously nobody has a tape like that at this point.

17 hours ago, fides' Jack said:

The problem is that I don't think you can even find that.  He was loved by the left, and by minorities, until 2016.  And he loved them because they loved him.  And that was enough for him because he's one of the single most egotistical people on the planet.

Yeah black people stopped "loving" Trump way before 2016.

17 hours ago, fides' Jack said:

Alternatively, if you can find me a policy that he's pushed for that's actually racist - and not just construed that way by the racist left, who want to hide their own agenda.  Then I'll accept that he's racist.

Well I don't think any of his policy positions are racist. But again, unless the policy said something like "Black people shall be banned from voting because of the color of their skin," I think you would have an explanation.

17 hours ago, fides' Jack said:

I tend to be overly verbose.  I think while I write, so I write a lot.

Yeah I didn't feel like responding to it point-by-point, because it's apparent that you aren't going to accept anything other than the sort of tape mentioned above. So there was not point in wasting my time with it.

17 hours ago, fides' Jack said:

You're obviously passionate about this subject, and most likely there is some truth to your side that you see very clearly.  I'd like to discover what that truth is, but I don't think it can be found by blatant accusations of racism (especially in the current religious/political atmosphere).

Why not? Let's say that Trump is racist, for the sake of argument. Obviously somebody has to make the accusation at some point for the discussion to occur. It seems that you take offense at the notion that anyone would even raise the question, but I find that unreasonable given his conduct.

How about a "blatant accusation of sexism"? You have your smoking-gun tape for that accusation. Is someone allowed to question whether Trump is a sexist because he said that he walks up to unknown women that he likes and grabs their sexual organs? Or would that also be a rash judgment and jumping to unfair conclusions, instead of "searching for the truth"?

17 hours ago, fides' Jack said:

Let me say one last thing: I was VERY much against Trump in 2016.  I disliked him on a personal level.  I disliked him on a political level.  I disliked the way he looked.  I disliked his arrogance.  But I never hated him.  The single most significant factor that has made me change my mind on him was the position that the left took on him.  They don't just dislike him.  They HATE him.  It's pure hatred and vitriol, and that level of hatred doesn't just happen with people.  It's clearly demonic.  The left is possessed, and if demons hate Trump that much, there's gotta be something good about him. 

Hatred towards a person can never, ever come from God, or anything holy.

So ask yourself, do you dislike him, or do you hate him?  

I don't hate anyone.

I'll say this - you seem to take issue with people accusing Trump as racist as being a form of rash judgment (even though there are plenty of good reasons why one might reach that conclusion). I think you are being hypocritical when you turn around and then accuse "The Left" (which includes about 1/2 of the people in the country) as being hateful and driven by demons.

If calling Trump racist is a rash judgment, so are your conclusions.

Have a nice day.

[Anomaly]

On 10/16/2020 at 12:20 PM, Peace said:

As for the "old definition" I think Merriam Webster's dictionary suffices:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism

1) a belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

2) the systemic oppression of a racial group to the social, economic, and political advantage of another

Peace, glad to see you’re back.  I’ve thought long on our conversation.  

I don’t dispute the above definition of racism, in a theoretical discussion.   When it comes to most people accused of racism, let’s look at definition 1.    Most of us would conflate culture with race, as well as a preference for their own culture over another’s.  A finely murky standard, but I think the root of differing perspectives when judging behaviors.  

Number 2 is another tough one.   It’s hard to differentiate the societal system oppression and the effects of your own choices and efforts, from ”white privilege”.    Especially in a society that is always pointing out people who are richer, better at sports, and more successful than you are.   We’re exposed to either tv ideals, or your own sociopath-economic peers.  You aren’t in a position to oppress anyone.  

Race, culture, body type, gender, behavior, that is different is used to hurt or belittle anyone.   It’s not a matter of superior or inferior, but preference for what works best for yourself.  

There is a difference in preference for who you are, that’s not disdain based on race.  

[fides' Jack]

1 hour ago, Peace said:

I don't hate anyone.

I'll say this - you seem to take issue with people accusing Trump as racist as being a form of rash judgment (even though there are plenty of good reasons why one might reach that conclusion). I think you are being hypocritical when you turn around and then accuse "The Left" (which includes about 1/2 of the people in the country) as being hateful and driven by demons.

If calling Trump racist is a rash judgment, so are your conclusions.

Have a nice day.

I'm glad you don't hate anyone.  My guess is there are others with similar opinions of Trump who do hate him.

I don't know that I would agree that "the left" encompasses 1/2 of the country.  I've thought about that before.  I don't think there is a really good definition of "leftism" as I've been using it, that would apply all the time.  To be honest, we probably all fall into it at times, including myself.

That's interesting that you brought up rash judgement.  I hadn't yet, but it has been on my mind.  I didn't want to use the term because just doing that carries with it an implied accusation of falling into it.  I suppose I'm guilty of that, anyway.

The difference is that I'm applying my logic generally, which is possible without falling into rash judgement.  I don't know whether specific individuals are being led by satan or are merely ignorant accomplices, or whether they're going crazy.  But as a whole, the left is clearly going into demonic directions now.  That's indisputable.  Abortion is always demonic.  Euthanasia is always demonic.  I don't know how little or how much Joe Biden specifically is under satan's direct control (if at all), but the left, in general, definitely is.

I hope you have a nice day, too.

[fides' Jack]

1 hour ago, Peace said:

How about a "blatant accusation of sexism"? You have your smoking-gun tape for that accusation. Is someone allowed to question whether Trump is a sexist because he said that he walks up to unknown women that he likes and grabs their sexual organs? Or would that also be a rash judgment and jumping to unfair conclusions, instead of "searching for the truth"?

Define sexism.  If sexism is the belief that women are inferior to men in some ways, or that men are inferior to women in some ways, then I should hope everyone is a sexist.

If sexist just means demeaning to women, then absolutely - he has fallen into that vice, at least in the past.

I never said that the guy was perfect.  I've brought up more of his bad qualities here than you have (including his comment regarding grabbing women).  He didn't dispute having said that, which at some point becomes an admission of guilt.  He may have outright admitted it.  I don't think it makes him a sexist, I think it makes him perverted.  But honestly, he's probably both sexist and perverted.  He's certainly a narcissist.  There's plenty of evidence for all of these things.

If I had his life, would I be any better?  I sincerely doubt it.  I'd probably be worse.

But racist?  Yeah, I haven't seen enough evidence of that, yet.  And even if he were overtly racist, which he isn't (if anything it's hidden somewhat), his policies and actions have greatly helped minorities, so I'd still vote for him this year just on policy alone.

1 hour ago, Peace said:

Obviously somebody has to make the accusation at some point for the discussion to occur.

Someone just needs to ask a question for a discussion to occur.  It need not be an accusation.

1 hour ago, Peace said:

It seems that you take offense at the notion that anyone would even raise the question

I'm not taking offense.  I'm just trying to defend the good name of another.

Ultimately you're just one dude, amid millions more who think the guy is racist.  And that's all I can really do, is try to defend him against one.

[Jaime]

1 hour ago, Peace said:

OK so it would take a tape of Trump using the N-word or calling black folks "monkeys" like they caught Reagan. That's actually what I suspected. "Unless I have a tape of Trump using the N-word, I will not believe." Why didn't you just say that at the start? The whole discussion could have been avoided, because obviously nobody has a tape like that at this point.

Yeah black people stopped "loving" Trump way before 2016.

Well I don't think any of his policy positions are racist. But again, unless the policy said something like "Black people shall be banned from voting because of the color of their skin," I think you would have an explanation.

Yeah I didn't feel like responding to it point-by-point, because it's apparent that you aren't going to accept anything other than the sort of tape mentioned above. So there was not point in wasting my time with it.

Why not? Let's say that Trump is racist, for the sake of argument. Obviously somebody has to make the accusation at some point for the discussion to occur. It seems that you take offense at the notion that anyone would even raise the question, but I find that unreasonable given his conduct.

How about a "blatant accusation of sexism"? You have your smoking-gun tape for that accusation. Is someone allowed to question whether Trump is a sexist because he said that he walks up to unknown women that he likes and grabs their sexual organs? Or would that also be a rash judgment and jumping to unfair conclusions, instead of "searching for the truth"?

I don't hate anyone.

I'll say this - you seem to take issue with people accusing Trump as racist as being a form of rash judgment (even though there are plenty of good reasons why one might reach that conclusion). I think you are being hypocritical when you turn around and then accuse "The Left" (which includes about 1/2 of the people in the country) as being hateful and driven by demons.

If calling Trump racist is a rash judgment, so are your conclusions.

Have a nice day.

So I have had friends that have said things like "You're Catholic? Have you ever thought about being Christian?"  I don't consider them anti Catholic (while the stance is objectively anti-Catholic) I just think they're stupid.  

I've been holding the opinion that Trump is really stupid on messaging.  Objectively I can see how one can see that as racist.  But on the flip side, he built an economy with the lowest black and hispanic unemployment in forever.  He genuinely seemed pleased with that.  I think if he was racist he'd feel the opposite.

So the obvious retort is being racist is by definition stupid.  I agree with that.  And I wouldn't come within 50 ft of defending him on women. He's a pig.

[Peace]

Quote

The difference is that I'm applying my logic generally, which is possible without falling into rash judgement.  I don't know whether specific individuals are being led by satan or are merely ignorant accomplices, or whether they're going crazy.  But as a whole, the left is clearly going into demonic directions now.  That's indisputable.  Abortion is always demonic.  Euthanasia is always demonic.  I don't know how little or how much Joe Biden specifically is under satan's direct control (if at all), but the left, in general, definitely is.

Well if advocating for sin as a matter of policy is demonic then you are caping for a demonic politician who is going in demonic directions. Look, Trump's stated policy stance on abortion, torture, for example, advocates for grave sin.

Edited October 21, 2020 by Peace

[fides' Jack]

 

2 minutes ago, Peace said:

Look, Trump's stated policy stance on abortion, torture, for example, advocates for sin.

What are you referring to?