Poll: Half of American voters believe Donald Trump is a racist

You're attacking a strawman. The FACT is that a large portion of the protestors were members of hate groups or supportive of racist ideology as is evident by their public display of racial bigotry, symbolism and associations. White Nationalists such as Richard Spencer and the KKK were involved in organizing these protests. Trump was well aware of this and doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt considering the fact that he was reluctant to condemn White Nationalists and pretended not to know enough about David Duke in the past to denounce him.



He simply has no credibility and a consistent pattern of lying and dishonesty.

This is reality:



Pretending that Trump was simply being objective in his response and judging all protestors fairly is the real fake news.

 

"You're attacking a strawman."

I want to shout: YES! That is exactly what I am doing. I am attacking the fake strawman, or is it red herring, I always get them confused, that Trump is some RACIST!, WHITE SUPREMACIST!, NAZI!. The trouble is, is that I think you are talking about some other supposed strawman.

"The FACT is that a large portion of the protestors were members of hate groups or supportive of racist ideology"

Yes! Not all! Therefore the Fake News narrative is a FRAUD! Stop being a sucker for their manipulations.

"White Nationalists such as Richard Spencer and the KKK were involved in organizing these protests. Trump was well aware of this and doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt considering the fact that he was reluctant to condemn White Nationalists and pretended not to know enough about David Duke in the past to denounce him."

I have a question. This is a serious question. I hope that you won't give it short-shrift, like you have with your previous responses to my posts...

Have you ever stopped to wonder just who it is that sets the rules? Who is it that decides that Trump must exhort the masses in their two minutes of hate toward their appointed Emmanuel Goldstein? Who decided that Trump must expend all of his efforts in the continual denounciation of some nobody? Have you ever stopped to wonder why you go along with such nonsense?

"Pretending that Trump was simply being objective in his response and judging all protestors fairly is the real fake news."

Because, obviously, anyone who doesn't live in lefty La-La Land must be pretending?

 

Let me help you out....

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/169/Strawman-Fallacy

Strawman Fallacy

Description: Substituting a person’s actual position or argument with a distorted, exaggerated, or misrepresented version of the position of the argument.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/150/Red-Herring

Red Herring

Description: Attempting to redirect the argument to another issue to which the person doing the redirecting can better respond. While it is similar to the avoiding the issue fallacy, the red herring is a deliberate diversion of attention with the intention of trying to abandon the original argument.

The topic of this discussion is the widely held opinion among American voters that Donald Trump is a racist. This view is supported by countless examples of comments, actions and policies that can easily be considered racist. You claim that the mainstream media has tried to spin statements by Trump in to condoning racism by saying that there were "very fine people on both sides" of The Charlottesville Riots.

In your view Trump's statement is being misrepresented because there could very well be "very fine people" involved in the protests who want to keep the statue of Robert E. Lee on display and don't condone racism. Morally speaking, "very fine people" do not march with Neo-Nazi/KKK/White Supremacist groups who publicly and violently expressed their racial hatred. Claiming that critics of Trump are being dishonest by condemning him for his offensive remark on the basis that he could be correct as not EVERYONE (100%) who marched can be assumed to be a racist is in fact a STRAWMAN.

No one is speaking in absolute terms about the moral character of each and every protestor but about making general statements about the group and what they represent. It's like saying that Trump's comments about Mexican immigrants being drug-dealers, murderers and rapists shouldn't be taken as a derogatory insult to Mexicans because he also said some of them were (he assumes) good people.

You are attacking a strawman which is plain to see by all intellectually honest debaters and readers. The language Trump uses is deceitful and deliberately so. He speaks this way so that he can condone the actions of the White Supremacists without admitting that's what he did in order to score political points with the far-right, many of whom are racists and bigots.

We know what he's doing. He's not fooling us and neither are his dishonest supporters.

Again STRAWMAN. And Trump is the one being manipulative as are you.

You know full well that I can not claim to know the moral stance on racism of every protestor nor have I claimed to. That is irrelevant to my point that the protests were dominated by pro-hate racists which makes Trump's comments extremely dishonest and deserving of criticism by anyone who opposes racism including political pundits.

Is it? Let's find out....

Trump doesn't have to say anything if he doesn't want to. The reality is that as President of the United States he has many responsibilities and expectations including addressing important social issues that affect the lives of the American people such as racism. The fact that David Duke, a former KKK Grand Wizard and the most well-known political advocate of White Supremacy in the United States, endorses Donald Trump and approves of his political goals as being "pro-White" (i.e. racist agendas that support White Nationalism and Separatism) is a concern to many Americans which is why journalists are constantly asking Trump if he approves of the support he is getting from White Supremacists.

Trump hesitates to outright condemn these groups because he knows that criticizing them will alienate a large portion of his supporters. He used racism to help win the election. He is not about to abandon the people who got him there.

Also there is no denying that hate crimes committed by White Supremacists have skyrocketed since Trump got elected:



https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...-absurd-claim-he-knows-nothing-about-former-/

Donald Trump in 1991:

Trump: "It's anger. I mean, that's an anger vote. People are angry about what's happened. People are angry about the jobs. If you look at Louisiana, they're really in deep trouble. When you talk about the East Coast — it's not the East Coast. It's the East Coast, the middle coast, the West Coast."

King: "If he runs and Pat Buchanan runs, might you see a really divided vote?" Trump: "Well, I think if they run, or even if David Duke — I mean, George (H.W.) Bush was very, very strong against David Duke. I think if he had it to do again, he might not have gotten involved in that campaign because I think David Duke now, if he runs, takes away almost exclusively Bush votes and then a guy like (Mario) Cuomo runs. I think Cuomo can win the election."

King: "But Bush morally had to come out against him." Trump: "I think Bush had to come out against him. I think Bush — if David Duke runs, David Duke is going to get a lot of votes. Whether that be good or bad, David Duke is going to get a lot of votes."

Donald Trump in 2016:

"Well, just so you understand, I don't know anything about David Duke. okay? I don't know anything about what you're even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. So, I don't know.

"I don't know, did he endorse me or what's going on, because, you know, I know nothing about David Duke. I know nothing about white supremacists. And so you're asking me a question that I'm supposed to be talking about people that I know nothing about. …

"I don't know any -- honestly, I don't know David Duke. I don't believe I have ever met him. I'm pretty sure I didn't meet him. And I just don't know anything about him."

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/individual/david-duke

David Duke is the most recognizable figure of the American radical right, a neo-Nazi, longtime Klan leader and now international spokesman for Holocaust denial who has nevertheless won election to Louisiana's House of Representatives and once was nearly elected governor.

He's not judging them fairly. That's a fact. Trump speaks with a forked tongue. He lies in one sentence, saying he didn't say what people have him on video or audio saying and then he changes his opinion to best suit his agenda. We all know that. The question is do you have the integrity to admit the truth? So far you have not.

 

So yes, the constant shrieks of RACIST! is a Red Herring.

Thanks!

"Claiming that critics of Trump are being dishonest by condemning him for his offensive remark on the basis that he could be correct as not EVERYONE (100%) who marched can be assumed to be a racist is in fact a STRAWMAN."

It's not an "offensive remark", it's simply a remark.

Beyond that, I'm not following the logic. I think that you are clinging to a particular view because you want to, rather than because of it having any validity.

It appears that you have agreed that it's possible Trump's statement was accurate. With that apparently being the case, I don't see how my argument (that the Fake News is being dishonest) is a strawman. Are you saying that the Fake News is just mistaken? Or, are you saying that it doesn't matter whether Trump was correct, or not; the only thing that matters is: RACIST!.

 

The only way you can not follow the logic is if you don't have the intellectual ability to do so or you're trolling. Maybe in your cause it is both. Trump's comment is being judged morally. Very fine people do not march with Neo-Nazi/KKK/White Supremacist hate groups and there is no denying that these riots were being organized by these type of people. You saying that Trump's comments were not offensive, given the facts, is a negative reflection on your moral views not the the honesty of the mainstream media who covered the event accurately. There is no reason to take you seriously after a post like this. Also you completely ignored the point about Trump knowing who David Duke was and what he stood for then lying and pretending that he didn't. If you say he forgot (so much for his good memory) or that he didn't have a moral responsibility when asked about White Supremacists directly then you are being dishonest which further supports my point.

Trump is mentally unfit to be President of the United States just as Obama said for this stance alone. There is no excuse for the way he responds to support from White Supremacists. His attitude towards the topic is directly responsibility for the surge in hate crimes committed by White Supremacists. Making America hate again is one of the worst blunders of his Presidency next to his treasonous association with Russia which should lead to his impeachment.

 

You claim to be opposed to the Antifa-terrorists. I think it's safe for me to assume that you believe that the Antifa-terrorists are bad people.

Obviously then, there could not have been any good people supporting the removal of the statue. After all, good people would never march alongside Antifa-terrorists.

 

What I said is that criminal mischief and senseless violence by any protestors is unacceptable. So while I support counter protests against White Supremacists or against White Supremacy I do not support breaking the law with violence and destruction of property.

You are making a moral equivalence between anti-racism or egalitarianism and racism when you speak as if it is ok to associate yourself with racist ideologues so long as you are not being violent during your protest. Everyone who came to protest with the intention to be violent was wrong. Only one side is morally wrong for their ideological motivation.

If you disagree explain how being involved in a protest organized by racist hate groups to oppose the removal of a statue of Robert E. Lee is morally defensible.

 

"You are making a moral equivalence between anti-racism"

You sir, are incorrect.

I am equating one group of bad people to another group of bad people. That's pretty much exactly what Trump did.

It's fair to hold the opinion that one group of bad people is worse than another group of bad people.

What is unfair, is to claim that just noting the fact that both of the groups are bad, is RACIST!.

As for the "anti-racism" claim:

I will never accept the concept of terrorism for a good cause.

The Antifa-terrorists claim to oppose fascism. Riiiight. They, and like-minded people, then label anyone, who is not far-left, a fascist. Once being branded a Nazi, fascist, racist whateverophobe, a person is deemed fair game for assault.

Yes, I think that the Antifa-terrorists are every bit as bad as Nazis and KKKers. I also think that the Antifa-terrorists are potentially more dangerous, because they, and their open acts of terrorism, enjoy much more public support.

Please explain why that makes me a RACIST! white-supremacist.

"If you disagree explain how being involved in a protest organized by racist hate groups to oppose the removal of a statue of Robert E. Lee is morally defensible."

Please explain how being involved in a protest organized by Antifa-terrorists, and Antifa sympathizers, is morally defensible.

 

The two are simply not comparable.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unite_the_Right_rally

Protestors:

Among the far-right groups engaged in organizing the march were the Stormer Book Clubs (SBCs) of the neo-Nazi news website The Daily Stormer,[36] The Right Stuff,[37] the National Policy Institute,[38] and four groups that form the Nationalist Front:[35] the neo-Confederate League of the South,[35] the neo-Nazi groups Traditionalist Worker Party,[39] Vanguard America,[39] and the National Socialist Movement.[35] Other groups involved in the rally were the Ku Klux Klan (specifically the Loyal White Knights branch) ,[12] the Fraternal Order of Alt-Knights,[39] Identity Evropa,[40] the Rise Above Movement,[41][42] the American Guard,[10] the Detroit Right Wings,[43] True Cascadia,[44] the Canadian-based ARM (Alt-Right Montreal) and Hammer Brothers,[45] and Anti-Communist Action.[10]

Prominent far-right figures in attendance included National Policy Institute Chairman Richard Spencer,[46] entertainer and internet troll Baked Alaska,[46] former Libertarian Party candidate Augustus Invictus,[47] former Ku Klux Klan Imperial Wizard David Duke,[48] Identity Evropa leader Nathan Damigo,[49] Traditionalist Workers Party leader Matthew Heimbach,[46] Right Stuff founder Mike Enoch,[46] Eric Striker of The Daily Stormer,[50] League of the South founder and leader Michael Hill,[8] Red Ice host and founder Henrik Palmgren,[51] The Rebel Media commentator Faith Goldy,[52] Right Side Broadcasting Network host Nick Fuentes,[53] YouTube personality James Allsup,[53] AltRight.com editor Daniel Friberg,[54] former Business Insider CTO Pax Dickinson,[55] Right Stuff blogger Johnny Monoxide,[56] Daily Stormer writers Robert "Azzmador" Ray and Gabriel "Zeiger" Sohier-Chaput,[57] Daily Caller contributor and rally organizer Jason Kessler,[58] and Radical Agenda host Christopher Cantwell.[59][60] Gavin McInnes, the leader of the self-described "Western chauvinist" Proud Boys group, was invited to attend but declined because of an unwillingness "to be associated with explicit neo-Nazis".[11] In June, ahead of the rally, McInnes declared that "we need to distance ourselves from them", but "after backlash to the original disavowal flared-up from Alt-Right circles, the statement was withdrawn and replaced with another distancing the Proud Boys from the event yet also encouraging those who 'feel compelled' to attend".[61]

Counter Protestors:

Those who marched in opposition to the rally were unified in opposition to white supremacy, but "espoused a wide array of ideological beliefs, preferred tactics and political goals. A large number were ordinary residents of Charlottesville who wanted to show their disdain for white supremacist groups, particularly after the Ku Klux Klan held a rally in the city on July 8."[67] Ahead of the rally, an array of "faith-based groups, civil rights organizations, local businesses, and faculty and students at the University of Virginia" planned counterprotests.[31] In July 2017, the ecumenical and interfaith clergy group Congregate Charlottesville called for a thousand members of the clergy to counterprotest at the rally.[35][68] The Charlottesville House of Prayer also gathered at the site to pray. Groups counterprotesting included representatives from the National Council of Churches,[69] Black Lives Matter,[70] Anti-Racist Action,[71] the Democratic Socialists of America,[72] the Workers World Party,[73] the Revolutionary Communist Party,[74] Refuse Fascism,[75] Redneck Revolt,[76] the Industrial Workers of the World,[77][78] the Metropolitan Anarchist Coordinating Council,[79] and Showing Up for Racial Justice.[71][80][81] Members of the Antifa movement were also in attendance.[16]

If you choose to associate with racist hate groups you are aligning yourself with advocates of a racist ideology. If you don't want to be associated with racism don't support a protest organized by racists. Doing so is morally indefensible. The anti-racist counter protestors can defend themselves morally and the peaceful protestors should not be judged by the violent factions within their united opposition to White Supremacy.

Basically anyone who marched with White Supremacists who does not want to be considered racist has some explaining to do and I'm willing to listen to their perspective but I agree with the political pundits who said that Trump was not sending a good message by comparing the two sides.

 

"The two are simply not comparable....."

Yes, they are.

"If you choose to associate with racist hate groups you are aligning yourself with advocates of a racist ideology. If you don't want to be associated with racism don't support a protest organized by racists. Doing so is morally indefensible."

If you don't want to be associated with Antifa-terrorists, Communists, Anarchists, and Globalists, don't associate with them.

You do understand that those groups hope for the actual destruction of the country; right?

Again, it's irrelevant how many bad people you list, it doesn't prove that there weren't good people there.

I maintain that there were also good people there with the Antifa-terrorists, Anarchists, Communists, and Globalists.

 

vs. a Confederate soldier who literally fought for the destruction of America?! Imagine if a German citizen marched alongside Neo-Nazis to protest the removal of the statue of Adolf Hitler or any member of the Nazi Party and asked to be judged morally as a good person. At worst for those who decided to march with Antifa but weren't violent protestors you can say they associated with people with questionable methods. Trump used poor judgment in his response to The Charlottesville Riots and he got called out on it. He also has a track record for encouraging racist rhetoric, associating with racist politicians and not firmly denouncing vocal advocates of White Supremacy such as David Duke.

Feel free to disagree or ignore the evidence but denying the truth won't make the criticism go away.

 

I don't have an opinion on the statue itself. I don't care about it, one way or the other.

I believe that it's not my business. It's a matter that should be decided by the local residents only. No outsiders had any business, weighing in, at all.

"At worst for those who decided to march with Antifa but weren't violent protestors you can say they associated with people with questionable methods."

I disagree. Antifa-terrorists use criminal methods AND have anti-American goals. The terrorists do have a good public relations team of sympathizers, though. They succeeded in wrapping themselves in the fraudulent narrative of 'opposing fascism', while being an anti-American goon squad.

The Antifa-terrorists have zero redeeming characteristics. They should all be on terrorist watch, no-fly, lists. They should all be flagged as ineligible to pass the gun-purchase background check. As soon as they show their masks in public, they should be unmasked, identified, and entered into a terrorist database.

 

So you are indifferent to the controversy over the removal of Confederate monuments and its relevance to race-relations in America and instead object to any support for Antifa due to their criminal activity. There's no point in debating about violent criminal acts of protesters as I've already denounced it. However I will state that I feel that the mainstream media covered this particular story fairly. My primary news source is CNN. Here are some examples of their coverage of this subject:







Feel free to comment on this or provide videos of your own related to the subject of this thread.

 

Between his involvement in the Birther movement, his Muslim ban, his various statements and actions against immigrants from "shithole" countries, and his half-heartedness when asked to condemn white supremacists...if he isn't racist himself, he's damn good at pandering to them. And what committed anti-racist would want to pander to racist voters at all?

 

Well, to be fair, some countries actually are shitholes and there is nothing racist about restricting immigration.

As an entrepreneur, I am sure Trump has done trillion times more for minorities than any of the careerpoliticians combined. Additionally, he married two immigrant women in a row. I am not a fan of Trump, but calling him a racist is just pathetic.

 

The Leftist mentality is this: Unless you agree with them 100%, then you are a racist.

 

Shithole is a derogatory insult which is commonly used by racists in White Nationalist communities to denigrate developing nations. The fact that Trump uses it indicates that he has been influenced by the point of view of far-right conservative media who are often racist but deny their racism because of their intellectual dishonesty. We know that Trump uses the internet a lot to communicate with supporters. Many politicians that he associates with have ties to the alt-right. More than likely Trump has been influenced by the language and message of alt-right supporters, internet personalities and politicians to speak like them. He also clearly panders to the alt-right with his political decisions as well as treats racist hate groups such as the KKK, Neo-Nazis, Confederates and others as if they were normal people with political views that deserve to be considered part of normal intellectual discourse.

Trump is a bigot and the most extreme bigot that has been elected President in modern history. Marrying immigrants doesn't mean anything when it comes to his hostility towards immigrants from developing nations, especially Latin America and Islamic countries where there are a lot of refugees and poor people willing to work hard who are living in horrible conditions. We know that Trump has a taste for exotic women, particularly Eastern Europeans and he is willing to make sexual advances on any model, porn star or actress he can get his hands on. So his wives and mistresses don't help his image especially considering the way he sexually objectifies women, including his own daughter and all of the accusations of sexual harassment, molestation and rape that have scandalized his Presidency.

An objective observer of Trump's personality, political views and moral values would recognize that he is a narcissist who used his success as a businessman and reality TV star to run for President. He doesn't care who he hurts with his messages or his policies so long as he gets his way and he gets credit for being a good President. There is enough corruption and scandal which have already been revealed which are grounds for impeachment. I don't know how much of his political views are genuine considering his political opinions and recommendations before running for President indicate that he was more of a moderate and even supported Democrats on key issues however people can change over time and narcissists tend to say whatever they want to gain favor with people they are trying to manipulate.

In this case Donald Trump is trying to manipulate the American people in to thinking he is for them and his Presidency will help America become a better country when everything he is doing indicates that he is making us less safe, more divided and damaging our reputation around the world which is alienating our allies and encouraging our enemies. The influence of Russia on our election is disturbing. I personally believe that Russia has dirt on Trump that could ruin his Presidency and potentially put him in prison if it were ever leaked. His collusion with the Russians to influence the 2016 Presidential Election is obvious and could lead to his impeachment after the mid-term elections. I think they have more on him though in the form of physical evidence of sexual misconduct and prostitution.

Trump's racism will not destroy his Presidency as he has enough support among conservatives who agree with a lot of his policies to give him a realistic chance of staying in office and even getting re-elected. But if the FBI investigation reveals that he has committed treason against America his base support among American voters may not be enough to save him from being impeached.

 

No, "shithole" is not a term exclusively used by White Nationalists. It is common, everyday speech used by people of all sorts of backgrounds and opininions. Perhaps one could argue such language is not suitable for a President, but racist? Definitely not.

Citations needed.

Define "Alt Right"and give examples of figures within it that "speaks like him". The fact you start your "argument" with "More than likely" indicates you are pulling crap out of your arse.

Well, that is actually the moat democratic thing one could do.

In Trump's own words; "some of them are good people."

"Exotic" is a very racist way of describing foreigners.

Citations needed.

You are incredibly paranoid.

Blah, blah, blah.

 

The term 'shithole' was invented by Hitler. He coined it so he wouldn't have to say the name of any country that allowed black people to have citizenship.

Today, the white-supremacist meetings all begin with the ritual chanting of every such nation. They do it by 'call and response'. The leader shouts a country's name, and the cheerful alt-right, white-supremacist, racist, neo-Nazis laugh as they yell 'shithole'.

It's great fun.

 

I get that a lot of Third World countries suffer from horrible poverty and related problems, but the problem is that Trump said he didn't want immigrants coming from those countries to the US (as if escaping poverty in search of better opportunities were was somehow undesirable). Instead he preferred immigrants from European countries like Norway. That he has a more favorable opinion of European immigrants than those from outside of Europe only confirms that he has an unfair bias against non-European people.

 

You are obsessed, my friend. You should stop reading the news. Like seriously.

 

I'm confused. Did you intend this to be some sort of rebuttal?

 

Of course you are confused.

 

Ah, Dyson the neo-Marxist racist hack moron who tries to blame cumulative centuries of black squalor on non-existent "white supremacy" conspiracy theories.

 

You seem to have missed the news reports of the first rally that stated regular folks came in to protest as a free speech issue and didn't realize it was organized by some former CNN-employee turned clown bus neo-Nazi.

It's quite interesting how many people are so fixated on the neo-Nazi clown bus that they're ignoring they're defending the violent anti-capitalist Marxist/Socialist/Anarchists of Antifa.