Trump.

[Geronimo]

At least it's clear that Geronimo would have argued that Hitler wasn't really as bad as those socialists and communists were accusing him well into '33.

Really? Such as when they split Poland with Hitler after signing the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact? I'm sure they were calling him the devil incarnate after they signed that (before he stabbed them in the back that is). Oh I'm sorry that's why you dropped the '33 reference. Not because later events otherwise make your point look foolish. If the socialists had said that Hitler planned to make everybody speak only German and forbid all other languages (as a hypothetical example) if I were alive to comment I'd be quick to say that there is plenty enough evil Hitler schemes to critique without pulling crap out of our arses to undermine our credibility with.

What is it with Trump's detractors all dead set on establishing meaningful parallels to Adolf Hitler when there is basicially no substance to the parallels at all.

[Ming]

No bill is perfect. The bill would have "helped" the problem. It was a step in the right direction.
But Trump doesn't care since it wasn't his. Now he can claim the Dems aren't doing anything even though he is the one not trying to solve the problem.
As usual, Trump first, Americans second (or don't matter)

[Lorizael]

In the US the Irish and Italians were infamous for totally "ruining" the "character" of the communities they would immigrate to...

Yeah man, and at the time, those swarthy Italians weren't considered white. Irish people may have been see as "white," but they weren't of the same civilized stock you found in England, say. Racism being adaptable doesn't make it not a thing.

[Ming]

When people start calling them vermin than it's a problem... oh wait...

[Dinner]

No bill is perfect. The bill would have "helped" the problem. It was a step in the right direction.
But Trump doesn't care since it wasn't his. Now he can claim the Dems aren't doing anything even though he is the one not trying to solve the problem.
As usual, Trump first, Americans second (or don't matter)

The bill was terrible as it would have forced all future presidents to bit enforce the law until more than 5000 illegals a day crossed. It enshrined open borders into law and that is a fact.

[Ming]

gee... both parties worked together to get the best bill possible. It would have been an improvement over what's going on now.
But it wasn't Trump idea, and it would take away his border rants... so screw the rest of his party and the American people. FACT!
While everybody else was trying to work on a solution, and agreed to it, Trump killed it for his own potential personal gain. Just another perfect example that Trump only cares about himself.

[Geronimo]

Yeah man, and at the time, those swarthy Italians weren't considered white. Irish people may have been see as "white," but they weren't of the same civilized stock you found in England, say. Racism being adaptable doesn't make it not a thing.

...but it does contribute to making it an individual vice. Laws, policies, individual people and sometimes organizations can be racists but even after that is established future policies, laws, individual acts and incarnations of the organization need to be evaluated in that regard on their own merits. The United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC) has an unambiguously and openly racist white supremacist past but at several occasions especially in recent history it has publicly condemned racism and white supremacy. We could justifiably choose to be suspicious of the UDC and keep a closer eye on its activities but we cannot simply declare it to be a racist organization in its modern incarnation based on its past. We have to look at the whole picture presented by it's activities and messages to-date with the recognition that more recent activities and statements have a far more direct connection to the current organization than prior ones. My point was never that racism isn't a thing but that charges of racism have become a lazy deeply cynical insult as much as an alarm of actual racism. That threatens to handicap opposition to racism. So why constantly cry wolf? What do we think will happen?

​
below is a link the the New York Times 2018 article: Donald Trump’s
Racism: The Definitive
List, Updated
By DAVID LEONHARDT and IAN PRASAD PHILBRICK
JAN. 15, 2018
​

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/01/15/opinion/leonhardt-trump-racist.html

Read the entire thing and you note Trump's usual pattern of generalizing and making absurdly unfounded generalizations but you will not find any definitive racism. This was supposed to establish denitively in 2018 that Trump is a racist. it's pretty weak sauce as damning evidence for such a damning charge.

In 1989, on NBC, Trump said:

I think sometimes a black may think they don’t have an advantage or this and that. I’ve said on one occasion, even about myself, if I were starting off today, I would love to be a well-educated black, because I really believe they do have an actual advantage.

I'd say this one technically is racist in that it is making a generalization based on race but if his supporters were to then ask me if I could regard the following:

I think sometimes a white man may think they don’t have an advantage or this and that. I’ve said on one occasion, even about myself, if I were starting off today, I would love to be a well-educated white male, because I really believe they do have an actual advantage.

as racist, I'd want to say no, not really, because it may just be an assertion of white male privilege. Unfortunately I'd also realize that they would instantly feel that this would exclude regarding Trump's "reversed" version of the same statement as racist. Trump is probably wrong that there is an advantage given to black males overall but he may have lost bids as a business man due to affirmative action policies and on the basis of his limited experience decided that this meant that being a black man confers an advantage. I personally hate all talk about generalizing based on race but if this is the kind of talk being used to establish that Trump is a racist. it's weak in that regard. If we also continuously hear that Trump is the most racist president we've had in decades and the likes of the material in this list is all we had up to 2018 then I think it even undermines the (IMHO real and true) narrative that racism is a real problem in America today. Trump may or may not be racist but he seems very reluctant to just say so outright. If so, I don't think there is any use in calling him out as racist. We should focus on how his actions are racist and the racist effects that they have had.​

[Geronimo]

When people start calling them vermin than it's a problem... oh wait...

would you say that if he called them deplorables?

[Uncle Sparky]

No. Many of the comments here are deplorable. The most deplorable posters, I can only see if someone quotes them.
None of the posters are vermin.
You avoid deplorable people, certainly not give them credibility.
Vermin you kill.
Trump supporters love Trump because he seems to hate the people they hate.

[Geronimo]

thank you for not blocking me. I'm not sure I agree with your comment but it is apparently well thought out and logical. I certainly agree that it would be a bad idea for any politician to call anyone "vermin" that there isn't broad consensus have forfeit their life such as terrorists who were still at large like Timothy Mcveigh briefly was.

[Geronimo]

The bill was terrible as it would have forced all future presidents to bit enforce the law until more than 5000 illegals a day crossed. It enshrined open borders into law and that is a fact.

cite this please. please don't tell me you learned this only from a video.

[Geronimo]

fyi don't use "fyi" as a edit justification when editing a post. apparently that is a red flag for a harmful edit.

[Lorizael]

...but it does contribute to making it an individual vice. Laws, policies, individual people and sometimes organizations can be racists but even after that is established future policies, laws, individual acts and incarnations of the organization need to be evaluated in that regard on their own merits. The United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC) has an unambiguously and openly racist white supremacist past but at several occasions especially in recent history it has publicly condemned racism and white supremacy. We could justifiably choose to be suspicious of the UDC and keep a closer eye on its activities but we cannot simply declare it to be a racist organization in its modern incarnation based on its past. We have to look at the whole picture presented by it's activities and messages to-date with the recognition that more recent activities and statements have a far more direct connection to the current organization than prior ones. My point was never that racism isn't a thing but that charges of racism have become a lazy deeply cynical insult as much as an alarm of actual racism. That threatens to handicap opposition to racism. So why constantly cry wolf? What do we think will happen?

Yeah, totally. Republicans freed the slaves... and now they actively court white supremacists. No one is crying wolf. Trump put kids in cages last time. And bombed a whole bunch of brown people. And called Mexicans rapists and murderers. Now he's promising mass deportations using the military. Maybe there's some convoluted way in which that only perfectly resembles racism and/or racist policies but isn't actually, but if so I don't really care. Whether he does and promises these things because it's what his supporters want or because he really believes the US should be a white only country, his actions cause demonstrable harm to minorities and he absolutely does not care.

​

If we also continuously hear that Trump is the most racist president we've had in decades...​

I don't think he is. Probably Nixon takes the top spot there. But Trump is actively, intentionally stoking racist fears and using the language of white supremacy because it gets him the best reactions at rallies. Frankly that's almost worst than just being a racist...

[Geronimo]

Yeah, totally. Republicans freed the slaves... and now they actively court white supremacists. No one is crying wolf. Trump put kids in cages last time. And bombed a whole bunch of brown people. And called Mexicans rapists and murderers. Now he's promising mass deportations using the military. Maybe there's some convoluted way in which that only perfectly resembles racism and/or racist policies but isn't actually, but if so I don't really care. Whether he does and promises these things because it's what his supporters want or because he really believes the US should be a white only country, his actions cause demonstrable harm to minorities and he absolutely does not care.

​


I don't think he is. Probably Nixon takes the top spot there. But Trump is actively, intentionally stoking racist fears and using the language of white supremacy because it gets him the best reactions at rallies. Frankly that's almost worst than just being a racist...

I guess I agree that stoking racism is definitely worse than being racist or even doing racist things but not stoking more racism. Trump is definitely stoking racism. I don't think he's a white supremacist and I don't think racism motivates him much but he definitely stokes racism and racist reasoning and that may be enough to vote against him all on its own.

I disagree that Republicans generally or even largely actively court white supremacists. Certainly not directly. and if they do so indirectly that doesn't really bother me since I have nothing against cheating a harmful fool out of his vote.

There is also tons of crying wolf. Everybody who opposes Dems is a racist or is working for racists. That is demonstrably false to millions. It makes accusations of racism seem suspect and cheap. Also putting kids in cages wasn't racist. Bombing a whole lot of brown people wasn't racist. Calling Mexicans rapists and murderers isn't racist the way he does it. After all he outright says that *everybody* crossing the border illegally are rapists and murderers and ex-cons and ex padded cell inmates.

Are you really saying that everybody whose actions cause demonstrable harm to racial minorities is a racist?

[Ming]

I don't think ANYBODY here has ever said that everybody who opposes Dems are racist.
I'm a former Republican who now considers myself a conservative Dem. And the reason for that is Trump and the Maga movement. Some in the Republican party are not Trump or part of the Maga movement.
But, Trump fans the racist flames to gain support. It's part of his thing as ANYBODY that has ever been to one of his rallies knows.
And it's hilarious whenever he says that he is the president that has done the most for Blacks... what a joke.

[Geronimo]

I don't think ANYBODY here has ever said that everybody who opposes Dems are racist.
I'm a former Republican who now considers myself a conservative Dem. And the reason for that is Trump and the Maga movement. Some in the Republican party are not Trump or part of the Maga movement.
But, Trump fans the racist flames to gain support. It's part of his thing as ANYBODY that has ever been to one of his rallies knows.
And it's hilarious whenever he says that he is the president that has done the most for Blacks... what a joke.

no, because the way it is done is when any conversation about any Republican goes long enough the probability that the Republican will be labelled as a racist rapidly rises to 100%. No Republican is ever given the benefit of the doubt w/r to being a racist despite the fact that seemingly all of them disavow racism.

[Ming]

No... That's total BS. Trump and his Maga crowd... YES. But not Republicans as a whole. I can think of Tons of Republicans who have never even been hinted as racists.