[Poll] Are you a racist if you support Trump today? (7/29/2020)

[qwertymac93]

I would say that supporting policies that disenfranchise people disproportionately because of their skin color is pretty fucking bad and immoral.

Disenfranchise is oddly specific. I'd replace it with "benefit" or "affect".

Then again, you seem like the type that thinks if someone doesn’t call themselves a racist then they can’t possibly be a racist. Sure that’s an opinion one could have but it doesn’t make it valid.

That's a bizarre statement that I've never made or believed for a single second in my life.

As far as you advocating against both sides, well maybe English isn’t your first language and your point was lost in translation because your post was most definitely bothsiderism. If you need me to highlight why for you I can.

My grasp of the English language isn't the problem here. Thanks for the offer, though.

 

[qwertymac93]

Lol for everything you can name in southern racism you can find just as many in northern states.

Christ, majority of the BLM in relation to cops shooting blacks are majority in northern states. Flint water. Most segregated schools in the nation. The list goes on and on and on.

But you keep giving yourselves an emotional self pat on the back like you're the do-gooders that have eliminated your huge ass racism pink elephant in the room. It's cute.

Surely we can all agree that racially segregated schools are a bad idea, right?

 

[ivwshane]

Disenfranchise is oddly specific. I'd replace it with "benefit" or "affect".

It was specific for a reason. Are you having trouble following the thread?

That's a bizarre statement that I've never made or believed for a single second in my life.

Good to know.

My grasp of the English language isn't the problem here. Thanks for the offer, though.

Ah, so you just aren’t very good at communicating then.

 

[ivwshane]

Surely we can all agree that racially segregated schools are a bad idea, right?

You are missing his (bogus) point.

 

[Maxima1]

My grasp of the English language isn't the problem here. Thanks for the offer, though.

Then your logic is.

This was basically a "they're equally bad" argument.

"You are cherry picking and are viewing the situation with a very heavy bias. Both sides obstruct the opposition, both sides have engaged in filibustering. "

This one is strange, since later on you argue this reasoning (i.e. comparing present to distant past) was absurd.You seem to be unaware that the present day Democrats are closer to the people who voted Republican in the distant past. The people who used to vote Democrat defected in droves over the Democrats pushing civil rights issues. They're now the Republicans who claim that the Confederates are a part of their heritage. And it's true; they're the succeeding generations of the old Democrats.

"The GOP worked to free the slaves and the Democratic party instituted Jim Crow and filled the ranks of the Klan. Picking your favorite color and pointing fingers is not an effective strategy for improving the world around you. "

Here:

"You seem to have framed it as if the group of people that utilized chattel slavery were the same group of people that joined the Republican party in the 90's. That's absurd and probably unintentional."

 

[ivwshane]

Then your logic is.

This was basically a "they're equally bad" argument.

"You are cherry picking and are viewing the situation with a very heavy bias. Both sides obstruct the opposition, both sides have engaged in filibustering. "

This one is strange, since later on you argue this reasoning (i.e. comparing present to distant past) was absurd.You seem to be unaware that the present day Democrats are closer to the people who voted Republican in the distant past. The people who used to vote Democrat defected in droves over the Democrats pushing civil rights issues. They're now the Republicans who claim that the Confederates are a part of their heritage. And it's true; they're the succeeding generations of the old Democrats.

"The GOP worked to free the slaves and the Democratic party instituted Jim Crow and filled the ranks of the Klan. Picking your favorite color and pointing fingers is not an effective strategy for improving the world around you. "

Here:

"You seem to have framed it as if the group of people that utilized chattel slavery were the same group of people that joined the Republican party in the 90's. That's absurd and probably unintentional."

I think he’s new to forum posting so he might be having trouble communicating and following along.

This despite the fact that his account is 12 years old and his first posts were in a thread about racism about how both sides are bad.

I’m not ready to call him a Russian plant just yet but if the ushanka fits...

 

[qwertymac93]

[Disenfranchise is oddly specific. I'd replace it with "benefit" or "affect".]

It was specific for a reason. Are you having trouble following the thread?

[That's a bizarre statement that I've never made or believed for a single second in my life.]

Good to know.

[My grasp of the English language isn't the problem here. Thanks for the offer, though.]

Ah, so you just aren’t very good at communicating then.

Given that so many people are not understanding what I am trying to say, that is likely.

You are missing his (bogus) point.

Even so, do you think they are a good idea or not? Is it that hard to find common ground with someone you dislike?

Then your logic is.

This was basically a "they're equally bad" argument.
...

No. The person I was originally responding to had made one-sided statements implying that one party had done good and the other had done bad. I was giving examples contrary to that so that it could be understood that neither side is without fault or merit. This was not a qualitative statement; I was not arguing degrees of badness.
The intention was to get a foot in the door for the idea that maybe picking a side and blindly bashing the opposition isn't the best idea and that it only leads to more polarization that doesn't help anyone.

This one is strange, since later on you argue this reasoning (i.e. comparing present to distant past) was absurd.You seem to be unaware that the present day Democrats are closer to the people who voted Republican in the distant past. The people who used to vote Democrat defected in droves over the Democrats pushing civil rights issues. They're now the Republicans who claim that the Confederates are a part of their heritage. And it's true; they're the succeeding generations of the old Democrats.

"The GOP worked to free the slaves and the Democratic party instituted Jim Crow and filled the ranks of the Klan. Picking your favorite color and pointing fingers is not an effective strategy for improving the world around you. "

Here:

"You seem to have framed it as if the group of people that utilized chattel slavery were the same group of people that joined the Republican party in the 90's. That's absurd and probably unintentional."

I didn't say comparing the present to the past was absurd; I said implying the people that owned slaves in the 1860s somehow survived to the 1990s was absurd! The people claiming confederate heritage today are southerners, not ex-democrats. All of this is beside the point anyway.

I think he’s new to forum posting so he might be having trouble communicating and following along.

This despite the fact that his account is 12 years old and his first posts were in a thread about racism about how both sides are bad.

I’m not ready to call him a Russian plant just yet but if the ushanka fits...

I came here to test Xenforo, and this thread was literally on the front page. I clicked because I was surprised such a thread could exist on a forum like this.
If you want to believe weird conspiracy theories, be my guest.

 

[TheVrolok]

I don't think one is necessarily racist him or herself of he or she supports Trump, however, he or she is supporting someone who is #1 with racists and that should cause a significant amount of self reflection.

 

[Jaskalas]

Surely we can all agree that racially segregated schools are a bad idea, right?

Throughout the nation people have self segregated into different neighborhoods. This results in separate school locations.
I wonder if it is true throughout the world, or if America has unique traits that have encouraged it?

 

[Jaskalas]

Given that so many people are not understanding what I am trying to say, that is likely.

As a political topic, a word of warning. People are present with their own biases and look to paint over other people with context, perceptions, and views of their own. It is not just a cordial sharing of their own views... but an aggressive assertion to claim opposing views are the devil. Thus, anyone not riding in on a white horse to right wrongs is a racist. Which is the vibe I have gotten from the previous page of posts.

It is bias leading them to think people could not be in opposition for other reasons. This whole topic is about choosing the intent and motive behind others. Behind ALL others, as a massively slanderous and libelous stereotype for half the nation. Probably also seasoned with a strong helping of guilty til proven innocent as well. After all their minds are made up, people are racist if they do not save the day and vote the correct way. Regardless of the many different reasons people vote.

This topic is a lesson in bias. For you must know what they know, and do what they do... or you are the devil.

 

[HomerJS]

Supporting anyone does not intrinsically make you a racist. However, if you think Trump is a racist, and you vote for him because of this, you are probably a racist. I hope(and suspect) that this is not a common occurrence.


You are cherry picking and are viewing the situation with a very heavy bias. Both sides obstruct the opposition, both sides have engaged in filibustering. The GOP worked to free the slaves and the Democratic party instituted Jim Crow and filled the ranks of the Klan. Picking your favorite color and pointing fingers is not an effective strategy for improving the world around you.

Furthermore, people who disagree with you aren't necessarily bad people. For example, Nobel prize winning economist Milton Friedman advocated against raising the minimum wage, as does economist Thomas Sowell. You may disagree and think the minimum wage should be increased, but that doesn't make those guys evil. In fact, they both thought/think the minimum wage laws hurt the poor. Thomas Sowell even thinks the laws were motivated by racist whites looking to keep blacks unemployed.

Just like my example of voting for a child molester. Does that means you will go around diddling kids? Maybe not. Does that mean you are willing to tolerate molesters? Absolutely yes. Which IMO is just as bad.

BTW - If you have to constantly go back 160 years ago to prove you are not the Party of racism time to update your CV.

 

[ivwshane]

As a political topic, a word of warning. People are present with their own biases and look to paint over other people with context, perceptions, and views of their own. It is not just a cordial sharing of their own views... but an aggressive assertion to claim opposing views are the devil. Thus, anyone not riding in on a white horse to right wrongs is a racist. Which is the vibe I have gotten from the previous page of posts.

It is bias leading them to think people could not be in opposition for other reasons. This whole topic is about choosing the intent and motive behind others. Behind ALL others, as a massively slanderous and libelous stereotype for half the nation. Probably also seasoned with a strong helping of guilty til proven innocent as well. After all their minds are made up, people are racist if they do not save the day and vote the correct way. Regardless of the many different reasons people vote.

This topic is a lesson in bias. For you must know what they know, and do what they do... or you are the devil.

While I’m sure that’s true for some, if we are being factual, has the Republican Party purposefully advocated for and passed policies that negatively impacted people of color in the last 12 years (aka in recent history)? Is it also true that trump has also supported and implemented policies that also negatively impacted people of color and used rhetoric that disparages people of color?

The answer, of course, is yes. If you want to make the case that people who support such a party aren’t also racist that’s fine but what you can’t argue against is that those same people are enabling racist policies to be enacted.

As far as people being the devil because of what they believe, I’m not aware of anyone, at least in this thread, making that accusation from any side of the discussion. Maybe you could get down from your high horse and engage people’s actual argument instead of arguing against claims no one has made.

 

[pauldun170]

Throughout the nation people have self segregated into different neighborhoods. This results in separate school locations.
I wonder if it is true throughout the world, or if America has unique traits that have encouraged it?

Wasn't by choice in many cases

A 'Forgotten History' Of How The U.S. Government Segregated America

Author Richard Rothstein says the housing programs begun under the New Deal were tantamount to a "state-sponsored system of segregation," in which people of color were purposely excluded from suburbs.

www.npr.org

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

Unfortunately, this sort of thing still goes on today.
Even if you do make it into the neighborhood of choice, the welcome you can receive truly suck.

 

[soundforbjt]

John Oliver had a great show last night about how the slave industry has been erased in textbooks for years.

 

[feralkid]

Throughout the nation people have self segregated into different neighborhoods. This results in separate school locations.
I wonder if it is true throughout the world, or if America has unique traits that have encouraged it?

Look up "redlining", then dope-slap yourself.

 

[qwertymac93]

Throughout the nation people have self segregated into different neighborhoods. This results in separate school locations.
I wonder if it is true throughout the world, or if America has unique traits that have encouraged it?

The answer to both of those questions is likely yes. People have a natural affinity to the known(and a fear of the unknown); this encourages immigrants, for example, to coalesce— especially if large groups migrate in a short amount of time. This is what causes things like China Town and Little Havana to form. That, in my opinion should not be encouraged by the government as it is better for a wider society to integrate cultures into a homogeneous national identity. However, I don't think this forced integration should be as heavy handed as in Singapore, for example.

Just like my example of voting for a child molester. Does that means you will go around diddling kids? Maybe not. Does that mean you are willing to tolerate molesters? Absolutely yes. Which IMO is just as bad.

BTW - If you have to constantly go back 160 years ago to prove you are not the Party of racism time to update your CV.

1)If you are not aware that someone is a "insert bad thing here* than voting for them is not an endorsement of *insert bad thing here*. Did you read my second sentence?

2)I didn't constantly go back 160 years; enough with the dishonest hyperbole.
I mentioned a few things that occured between 50 and 155 years ago in ONE sentence. I then immediately began talking about something else. Economics? Minimum wage? Disagreement? Did you see that?

The only people stuck in the past are the people in this comment section consistently misunderstanding a single sentence so they can crusade against a statement not made.

 

[HomerJS]

1)If you are not aware that someone is a "insert bad thing here* than voting for them is not an endorsement of *insert bad thing here*. Did you read my second sentence?

2)I didn't constantly go back 160 years; enough with the dishonest hyperbole.
I mentioned a few things that occured between 50 and 155 years ago in ONE sentence. I then immediately began talking about something else. Economics? Minimum wage? Disagreement? Did you see that?

The only people stuck in the past are the people in this comment section consistently misunderstanding a single sentence so they can crusade against a statement not made.

Trump's racism and sexual assaults were KNOWN so...

Ok but 50-155 years ago is still too long.

So what is the deal breaker for Trumpers? If it comes out Trump had sex at Epstein's house with trafficked underage girls think they will break from him? Based on all evidence to date the answer is no. What does that say about them?

 

[Stokely]

One man's racism is another man's "good old times". There's a reason Trump's main stronghold is with white, older and uneducated males. They have been shitting downhill on everyone else for literally centuries, so no wonder they don't like the trend and want the good times back. Good luck with that. If it wasn't for vote suppressing and gerrymandering they'd already be an afterthought and have to actually work to get along with people in a spirit of fairness if they want a seat at the table. Rather than doing that, they just want their top spot back for free. Trump appeals to that, the fact that he's a bonafide racist is probably a bonus to some, something to ignore to the rest of them.

 

[mect]

I don't know that I would go so far as to say that anyone that votes for Trump is racist, but anyone voting for Trump is at a minimum tolerant of racism.

 

[qwertymac93]

While I’m sure that’s true for some, if we are being factual, has the Republican Party purposefully advocated for and passed policies that negatively impacted people of color in the last 12 years (aka in recent history)? Is it also true that trump has also supported and implemented policies that also negatively impacted people of color and used rhetoric that disparages people of color?

I think the Democratic party has advocated for and passed policies that negatively impacted people of color in recent history. I also think Joe Biden has supported and implemented policies that also negatively impacted people of color and used rhetoric that disparages people of color.

The difference is I don't think people who vote for Biden MUST be a racist, because I realize they may not be aware or believe that he has done those things.

Going back to my very first comment, some people think the minimum wage laws hinder [people of color] and that raising the minimum wage would be detrimental to those people. Would it then be reasonable to say all Democrats are racist because many of them support raising the minimum wage?

Trump's racism and sexual assaults were KNOWN so...

KNOWN?
You can't possibly know what was in the head of the ~63 million people that voted for Trump. You don't know what they knew. You can't assume someone knows what you know.

That's precisely the problem with this thread. Too many people think that because someone has made a different decision, they must also hold different morals when it is also possible that they hold different information.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

You can't possibly know what was in the head of the ~63 million people that voted for Trump. You don't know what they knew. You can't assume someone knows what you know.

That's precisely the problem with this thread. Too many people think that because someone has made a different decision, they must also hold different morals when it is also possible that they hold different information.

It's basically this in the form of racism now as far as how our childish politics work

 

[ivwshane]

I think the Democratic party has advocated for and passed policies that negatively impacted people of color in recent history. I also think Joe Biden has supported and implemented policies that also negatively impacted people of color and used rhetoric that disparages people of color.

The difference is I don't think people who vote for Biden MUST be a racist, because I realize they may not be aware or believe that he has done those things.

Going back to my very first comment, some people think the minimum wage laws hinder [people of color] and that raising the minimum wage would be detrimental to those people. Would it then be reasonable to say all Democrats are racist because many of them support raising the minimum wage?

KNOWN?
You can't possibly know what was in the head of the ~63 million people that voted for Trump. You don't know what they knew. You can't assume someone knows what you know.

That's precisely the problem with this thread. Too many people think that because someone has made a different decision, they must also hold different morals when it is also possible that they hold different information.

Whataboutism at its finest. Go ahead and show your work. Provide for us examples of these Democrat policies that are purposefully put in place to hurt people of color that are still supported by the democrat party.

How long shall we wait?

 

[pauldun170]

I think the Democratic party has advocated for and passed policies that negatively impacted people of color in recent history. I also think Joe Biden has supported and implemented policies that also negatively impacted people of color and used rhetoric that disparages people of color.

Show your work.
In regards to policy and law, cite the specifics.
Should be easy since it can pulled from *.gov websites.

 

[qwertymac93]

Whataboutism at its finest. Go ahead and show your work. Provide for us examples of these Democrat policies that are purposefully put in place to hurt people of color that are still supported by the democrat party.

How long shall we wait?

I didn't say it was on purpose.

You know what, I'm tired of starting my comments with "I didn't say that".
If you guys can't stop yourselves from projecting your own ideas onto my statements I can't continue engaging you.
I refuse to talk AT someone who isn't listening and is apparently willfully misconstruing every word I write.

The war on drugs was supported by many democrats(including Biden); it harms many people to this day.
I don't think they were TRYING to hurt these people, but they did.
If you want to talk WITH me, be my guest.

Show your work.
In regards to policy and law, cite the specifics.
Should be easy since it can pulled from *.gov websites.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/98th-congress/senate-bill/1762
https://www.congress.gov/bill/100th-congress/house-bill/5210
Also, see above.

 

[brycejones]

I didn't say it was on purpose.

You know what, I'm tired of starting my comments with "I didn't say that".

That's a sign that you're communicating poorly. Its on you to communicate clearly.