Is it possible to have a civil discussion about racists supporting Trump?

Correct. They claim to be tolerant but the moment they don't get their way, they riot and assault. Here are some tolerant liberals beating up trump supporters.

 

Seems the silent majority is growing very tired of their violence towards anyone that doesn't agree with their *******ed demands. If something sparks I have to imagine they will hide from any real conflict. They seem tough only when they out number Trump supporters.

 

They are fine gathering in the thousands and then burning down cities and assaulting people, yet when it's time to fight for our country, I've met VERY few liberals in my time in the Army. Very few. Never any of them officers or senior NCOs

You'll NEVER hear someone say "Man, that SGM sure is liberal!"

 

What about Communist support for Hillary?
I guess no discussion is needed about that.
Communism just killed 100 million people, no big deal.

 

Like I said, the bigotry, insults and false accusations from the Democrat party has alienated your party from mainstream America. You are an excellent representative of the Democrat party

 

Your being pissy about a political party does not serve as a viable diversion from the cogent reality: There has never before been a US president that has so energized and evoked the allegiance of neo-nazi and white supremacist organizations in America.

Acknowledging their unprecedented affinity for Trump may upset you, but suppressing an awareness of it would be craven. We must all summon the testicular fortitude to honestly confront it.

 

Probably not. The word is too charged. Once you judge and label someone a racist you've crossed the line and the discussion is already not civil. If you want a civil (courteous; polite) discussion, you have to abandon that term.

It is possible to have a civil discussion about the issues that cause one person to believe another is racist. You can bring up preconceptions, prejudgements, and unreasonable beliefs... the unnecessary problems they cause and how they seem to be supported by statements coming from the Trump machine. It's a harder conversation. We all loose our tempers at times. Name calling is easier (and often justified). But when we resort to calling someone a racist, it's no longer civil discussion.



​

 

The Trump supports I reference are self-proclaimed neo-nazis and white supremacists (or "separatists"), members of organizations that have officially endorsed and continue to support Trump.

I let them speak for themselves, take them at their word, and do not impose my personal sentiments upon them.

It is unprecedented for such groups to avow allegiance to any American president. Their unique affinity for Trump and what instills it in them is of legitimate public interest.

If a candidate were hailed as their "Leader" by NAMBLA, would that not properly attract public interest? Would the American public, quite rightly, not wish to determine why NAMBLA is so uniquely enthused about such an individual?



.

 

I share many of your concerns. That StormFront endorsed Trump early on, that David Duke and his organization so enthusiastically campaigned for Trump... yea, it made me wonder why people bound with such disturbing philosophies seemed so enthusiastic about this candidate.

It's worth discussing. I just think that discussion will be more productive if we make the effort to leave the word racist out of that discussion. *shrug*



​

 

I don't know why avowed racial supremacists would eschew the label "racist", but it is certainly possible to discuss their regarding Trump as their "leader" without using a label that may not be "pc" for some.

Regardless of the terminology, the fact that no other American POTUS has ever won the allegiance of these groups is of legitimate interest if not concern, and I suspect the motives of those who adamantly wish to suppress candid discussion of it and its implications.

 

So much for civil discussion, it would appear your intent is nothing more than an attempt to assign guilt by association, when the only factual association and insignificant in its' contribution to the outcome is/was the rejection of your supported candidate in the Presidential election.

How many race cards are there in a deck?

 

NAMBLA supported obama, and obama appointed NAMBLA members to government offices. For example, he appointed Kevin Jennings to Dep Sec for Safe and Drug Free Schools.

Were you outraged that Obama gave the position responsible for childrens safety to a man who supports pedophilia and the legalization of sex with children?

Don't tell us you didn't know of the DNC and obama's ties to NAMBLA.

 

Why are you so upset that out of 320,000,000 people a tiny, tiny group says it supports a candidate? Every election, every candidate has a handful of lunatics supporting him/her, that's what happens in a free society. Because someone supports a candidate does not mean the support is mutual, it does not even mean the candidate even knows of the support or has policies that reflect that supporters agenda.

I'm sure you can find someone who voted for Trump because Hilary is a woman. That does not mean Trump hates women - its obvious he does not, he has always appointed women to powerful positions in his organizations.

Do you make up your own mind, or do you let a tiny fringe element make your decision for you?

 

It is a legitimate concern. Frankly, it scares me. All the more reason we should bring as many people to the table as possible and try to keep this difficult discussion from getting side tracked with volatile language. Like you said, keep it civil.



​

 

Donald Trump said you have to treat women like sh*t.



​

 

The issue is you making a decision to support someone because you were informed, or because you are not informed and followed someone else.

 

You are not being clear.



​

 

Your fraudulent nonsense concerning a former president fails as a contrived digression from the current POTUS's documented allegiance by neo-nazis and other white supremacists.

Your crackpot "alternative facts" media is filling your noggin with doodoo. Jennings never had any affiliation with NAMBLA, nor did he ever express support for that organization.

Try to overcome your attention deficit with intent and deal with current reality.

 

You fail to divert attention from the matter of neo-nazis' and other white supremacists' documented support of Trump. Please try to focus upon that current reality.

 

One must deal with the reality of this thread, while it may be true the groups you refer to support Trump, you seem to infer that to mean Trump supports them.
Adulation, worship, proclaimed leader? Perhaps supported and voted for the least undesirable candidate would suffice.

 

And here we see another "progressive" (and one who does not live in the USA) trying desperately to ignore facts.

Google Kevin Jennings. Its easy to do, spend a few minutes educating yourself.

 

Honestly I can't think of a single trump voter that I knew personally that would fall into the racist category and I know quite a few, they spent a lot of time trying to convince me to vote for Trump.

Are there fringe idiots? Of course there are but there are fringe idiots on both sides, easily dismissed.

Personally I think the left needs a big chill pill.