What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

"Official" Donald Trump for President: Great Wall of Mexico (1 Viewer)

Status
Not open for further replies.
So you are justifying identity politics and reverse discrimination because of slavery, which ended 153 years ago, and Jim Crow, which ended 51 years ago (for the most part).  And "general treatment"... A little nondescript don't you think?  There's a growing number of people in this country who believe that equal opportunity exists for people of color.  In some cases they are clearly advantaged, particularly with regard to college admissions and white color jobs.  There was a time and place for affirmative action and identity politics.  They time has passed.  We are all just Americans now, and no one should be given preferential treatment or be discriminated against.
I 100% agree. Most of the problems minorities have are economic-based which would be solved by more school funding, especially pre-K, and education programs for parents in lower income areas of all races. Also, making community college free for everyone would encourage minorities to stay in school and pursue a college degree.

 


Not one of the Trunp supporters in this thread or elsewhere in this forum have offered the "he doesn't mean it" explanation. Instead, when they have responded to my questions about bigotry, they either attempt to avoid the issue or offer reasons as to why Trumps statements, which they agree with, are not actually bigoted. I find the reasons offered to be insufficient, but the key is that Trump's supporters generally agree with what I regard as the bigotry. That's the ugly truth which many people keep trying to deny. 
I think you confuse Bigotry with Political Correctness. Trump is not politically correct. He says what he is thinking not what fox news wants to hear.

 
Higgs, even if you're right about what you just wrote (I won't concede that but it's a legitimate point of discussion) it still doesn't justify Trump's attempt at white identity politics. That's still no different from racism no matter how you slice it. In your response you admitted that black identity politics was once justified though you think it is not anymore. But white identity politics has NEVER been justified; it has always been racism. 

 
So you are justifying identity politics and reverse discrimination because of slavery, which ended 153 years ago, and Jim Crow, which ended 51 years ago (for the most part).  And "general treatment"... A little nondescript don't you think?  There's a growing number of people in this country who believe that equal opportunity exists for people of color.  In some cases they are clearly advantaged, particularly with regard to college admissions and white color jobs.  There was a time and place for affirmative action and identity politics.  They time has passed.  We are all just Americans now, and no one should be given preferential treatment or be discriminated against


Loving the board upgrade. :thumbup:

 
In fairness, while I have never assaulted a reporter nor bitten a stripper I can see how either could happen, under the right circumstances.  On these two examples I am going to take the old "Judge not" stance.  that is not to say that I don't take your point, just that I don't find that one point to be a knock out, a scoring punch sure, but not a knock out blow.
Yes, let him he who has not run up a $900 strip club tab and then bit a stripper and been forced to resign in disgrace from the federal government cast the first stone.

 
This is a fair point. We should not allow this isolated incident to cloud the otherwise sterling reputation of a respectful and respected man like Corey Lewandowski.

Regarding the lawyer: I can indeed imagine the circumstances in which a stripper-biting in south Florida in the 1990s could happen. I believe the late Rick James said it best ...
As he so commonly did.

 
Yes, let him he who has not run up a $900 strip club tab and then bit a stripper and been forced to resign in disgrace from the federal government cast the first stone.
Exactly, that's all I'm saying, or at least don't be casting the stones if you recognize that it might happen to you in the future, lie this Friday, potentially.

 
Higgs, even if you're right about what you just wrote (I won't concede that but it's a legitimate point of discussion) it still doesn't justify Trump's attempt at white identity politics. That's still no different from racism no matter how you slice it. In your response you admitted that black identity politics was once justified though you think it is not anymore. But white identity politics has NEVER been justified; it has always been racism. 
This really was Duke's tack in LA. About the immigration issue, let's just say there is a kernel of truth to it, that kernel being that there are some illegal immigrants who come to the US and commit heinous crimes. Ok. And let's say some people feel that is under-reported and no one in government is doing enough to address that. Ok. Now along comes Candidate X and he speaks these undeniable Truths. Oh my yes, hallelujah, glory be, the Truth has been spoken. Well after that the people who want these Truths spoken will take any other garbage, any untruths and even plain revelations of fact about this candidate's character and beliefs and disregard them because they know there is no other standard bearer because Candidate X has told them that 'without me there is no one else, I am The Cause.' And so it goes with the 'white' vote which theretofore has not been identifying itself as 'white' or anything but now they are White and they are put upon, they are being robbed and are being ripped off by wastrels who steal their money and sit on porches drinking gin and juice and that's what's making the Great State such a sh+hole.

In the end for Duke it was not a successful strategy. Now it was successful in that he made a ton of money through his books, speeches and organizations and became an international star for Holocaust Denial but electorally he was in the low 40's range in two statewide elections. The strategy itself is a loser, all other considerations aside.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Commish said:
It's rather simple to explain, but you won't like the explanation.  He's saying these things to get elected and he doesn't believe a single one of them.  You're good with saying what's necessary to get the nomination right?  Or does that just apply to Hillary?  NOTE:  This is NOT a defense of Trump rather an explanation for his behavior.  I pointed out several months ago that I believed this was what he was doing.  Of course this doesn't make it right, but the show you're seeing doesn't mean it's anything more than a show.  You should understand this concept being a Hillary supporter.
Not one of the Trunp supporters in this thread or elsewhere in this forum have offered the "he doesn't mean it" explanation. Instead, when they have responded to my questions about bigotry, they either attempt to avoid the issue or offer reasons as to why Trumps statements, which they agree with, are not actually bigoted. I find the reasons offered to be insufficient, but the key is that Trump's supporters generally agree with what I regard as the bigotry. That's the ugly truth which many people keep trying to deny. 
You've got yourself backed into a nice little corner here, but there's no reason to deflect.  Who cares if the bold is true or not?  It has nothing to do with the plausible explanation I have given.  Trump could easily be pulling off the biggest political puppet show you'll ever see.  If they had offered the explanation would it really matter to you?  Of course not.  Now, of course, this is all deflection from the bigger point where you said it didn't matter to you that Hillary was lying because it's what is necessary to get elected..  YOU have to reconcile why you choose that approach with her comments and you choose not to take that position with Trump's.  

 
You've got yourself backed into a nice little corner here, but there's no reason to deflect.  Who cares if the bold is true or not?  It has nothing to do with the plausible explanation I have given.  Trump could easily be pulling off the biggest political puppet show you'll ever see.  If they had offered the explanation would it really matter to you?  Of course not.  Now, of course, this is all deflection from the bigger point where you said it didn't matter to you that Hillary was lying because it's what is necessary to get elected..  YOU have to reconcile why you choose that approach with her comments and you choose not to take that position with Trump's.  
That's not difficult at all. The answer is that none of Hillary's changed positions, such as being for TPP or against it, being for Keystone or against it, etc, fall into the heinous category of bigotry. If Hillary started making bigoted comments on the order of Donald Trump I would stop supporting her immediately, whether or not I thought she meant them. 

 
So the discussion got me.  I actually went to look for information on this assault which has been under discussion.  Good lord.  On one side we have a person making statements, not legal defense arguments- but statements, against clear visual evidence to the contrary.   On the other side we have a hot house flower who insists that touching no more offensive than one would encounter on a trading floor of a commodities market or stock exchange floor, or in public transportation or nigh clubs for that matter, now be elevated to a criminal matter.

A pox on both their houses.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Higgs, even if you're right about what you just wrote (I won't concede that but it's a legitimate point of discussion) it still doesn't justify Trump's attempt at white identity politics. That's still no different from racism no matter how you slice it. In your response you admitted that black identity politics was once justified though you think it is not anymore. But white identity politics has NEVER been justified; it has always been racism. 
Most people view racism as racism.  This whole notion that reverse discrimination is not racism is you notion, and the liberal sociologists who "declared" in the 90's a new definition of racism that it could only apply to the race in power.  The standard definition of racism prior to that had always been the common sense one - that racism is discrimination based on race.

Identity politics has outlived its usefulness, and in my opinion the only reason it hangs on is so that Democrats can continue to pander and lock in the minority vote.  It's divisive and is hurting the country.

 
Skoo said:
:goodposting:

It really is something to behold. To me the biggest sign that people just like him is how willing his supporters seem to be to abandon their "conservative principles" to back him. These people went INSANE over Obamacare, but suddenly are completely on board with Universal Healthcare since Trump is for it. 
That's what the newest attack ad against Trump is focusing on.  Sadly I tend to think Trump saying everyone should have healthcare will raise more ire among Republicans than the one where women read sexists quotes from the Trumpster.   

 
Higgs, even if you're right about what you just wrote (I won't concede that but it's a legitimate point of discussion) it still doesn't justify Trump's attempt at white identity politics. That's still no different from racism no matter how you slice it. In your response you admitted that black identity politics was once justified though you think it is not anymore. But white identity politics has NEVER been justified; it has always been racism. 
I hate to interrupt the awesomeness of the Lewandowski assault and stripper-biting lawyer story, but no. It's not a legitimate point of discussion. The notion that we live in a post-racial America and that we should have policies that reflect it is total nonsense. Read the DOJ report on Ferguson, or any of the several longform articles that touched on how police prey on poor black communities to fund their departments. Read Coates' careful history of discrimination and familiarize yourself with things like redlining and predatory lending. Take a look at the obvious motivations behind those nonsensical voter ID laws. Or consider the Trump-led birther movement.

Higgs seems like a good guy so I assume his position that we we live in a post-racial America comes from ignorance of these things rather than something worse, but that doesn't make it legitimate or true to say that "we are all just Americans" or that arguments to the contrary depend entirely on things that ended a long time ago like slavery or Jim Crow laws.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
That's what the newest attack ad against Trump is focusing on.  Sadly I tend to think Trump saying everyone should have healthcare will raise more ire among Republicans than the one where women read sexists quotes from the Trumpster.   
I don't think it will make any difference either. 

None of this will have any effect on Trump's supporters within the conservative movement, because Donald Trump has allowed their collective id to emerge: against Muslims, against Latino illegal immigrants. That's the key to his popularity. 

 
I hate to interrupt the awesomeness of the Lewandowski assault and stripper-biting lawyer story, but no. It's not a legitimate point of discussion. The notion that we live in a post-racial America and that we should have policies that reflect it is total nonsense. Read the DOJ report on Ferguson, or any of the several longform articles that touched on how police prey on poor black communities to fund their departments. Read Coates' careful history of discrimination and familiarize yourself with things like redlining and predatory lending. Take a look at the obvious motivations behind those nonsensical voter ID laws. Or consider the Trump-led birther movement.

Higgs seems like a good guy so I assume his position that we we live in a post-racial America comes from ignorance of these things rather than something worse, but that doesn't make it legitimate or true to say that "we are all just Americans" or that arguments to the contrary depend entirely on things that ended a long time ago like slavery or Jim Crow laws.
:lmao: I hate to do it but Tobias you're going on ignore for what i hope is a troll.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I hate to interrupt the awesomeness of the Lewandowski assault and stripper-biting lawyer story, but no. It's not a legitimate point of discussion. The notion that we live in a post-racial America and that we should have policies that reflect it is total nonsense. Read the DOJ report on Ferguson, or any of the several longform articles that touched on how police prey on poor black communities to fund their departments. Read Coates' careful history of discrimination and familiarize yourself with things like redlining and predatory lending. Take a look at the obvious motivations behind those nonsensical voter ID laws. Or consider the Trump-led birther movement.

Higgs seems like a good guy so I assume his position that we we live in a post-racial America comes from ignorance of these things rather than something worse, but that doesn't make it legitimate or true to say that "we are all just Americans" or that arguments to the contrary depend entirely on things that ended a long time ago like slavery or Jim Crow laws.
Thanks. I tend to agree with this. I suppose I was trying to be overly kind. 

 
MOP, I didn't answer your question about the Israeli wall because I thought it was rhetorical. Of course that wall doesn't work; Palestinian terrorists have simply altered their methods (Google the stabbings.) 

But in any case I'm confused by this talk of a wall on our southern border stopping terrorism anyhow. All of the 9/11 terrorists came here through Canada. Shouldn't the wall be on our northern border? 
We have intercepted Al Quaeda and ISIS intell that shows plans to smuggle an NBCR weapon into the US by smuggling it into Central/Douth Smerica and driving it by truck through the border.  I believe we even found a Manual showing the detailed plans.  Just because it didn't happen that way on 9/11 is no reason to think it won't be their preferred M.O. going forward. 

 
I don't think it will make any difference either. 

None of this will have any effect on Trump's supporters within the conservative movement, because Donald Trump has allowed their collective id to emerge: against Muslims, against Latino illegal immigrants. That's the key to his popularity. 
This is ridiculous.  Why don't you just say all conservatives (should be replaced with moderates as Trumps support doesn't come from conservatives) are racist and be done with it.

Maybe a better way to put this very narrowed, simplified view would be to say that moderates are against ILLEGAL immigration.  Not immigrants. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Are you anti Trump nuts this rabid about him in your real lives?  I mean I've never seen an obsession at this level. You guys literally cannot keep yourselves away for even a day. 

 
That's not difficult at all. The answer is that none of Hillary's changed positions, such as being for TPP or against it, being for Keystone or against it, etc, fall into the heinous category of bigotry. If Hillary started making bigoted comments on the order of Donald Trump I would stop supporting her immediately, whether or not I thought she meant them. 
Seems like a pretty arbitrary line especially when it comes to pandering to the lowest common denominators (the bases of the parties).  When it comes to bigotry, I'm not sure it matters whether it's on display via the spoken word or via one's actions.  I'd like to understand why you think it does.

 
Are you anti Trump nuts this rabid about him in your real lives?  I mean I've never seen an obsession at this level. You guys literally cannot keep yourselves away for even a day. 
All the tough guys save it for the internet RBM.

 
Not one of the Trunp supporters in this thread or elsewhere in this forum have offered the "he doesn't mean it" explanation. Instead, when they have responded to my questions about bigotry, they either attempt to avoid the issue or offer reasons as to why Trumps statements, which they agree with, are not actually bigoted. I find the reasons offered to be insufficient, but the key is that Trump's supporters generally agree with what I regard as the bigotry. That's the ugly truth which many people keep trying to deny. 
I've meant to respond a couple of times with this exact explanation, but I thought it was generally assumed that this is what we we were thinking.  The guy is a blow hard.  He talks way way too much.  When you an anti PC guy, with no experience in politics, and you talk a lot - guess what?  You are going to say a few things that are totally outrageous, particularly when viewed on a stand-alone basis without any further refinement of what was meant.  Here's my take, and I said it from day 1 - Trump probably meant to say that the moratorium for immigration was to be from Muslim countries where there has been a history of terrorism.  The next question is, if he misrepresented that, why didn't he take it back?  Great question, and one we will hopefully get an answer to some day when Trump's autobiography comes out.  My guess is that the guy learned from an early age that acknowledging mistakes is a sign of weakness.  He rarely does it.  He won't say "I was wrong".  What he may say is, "I have changed my mind", or, "I have evolved".  It's one of my biggest problems with him to be honest.  I think it borders on unnecessary and unhelpful hubris and hurts him way more than it helps.

Of course, I could be wrong and he knows exactly what he is doing, and he really is a bigot.  I have to concede this as a possibility.  I wouldn't presume to make any definitive declarations about what is in a guy's heart, and I can't understand why people on the Left feel that they have the magical ability to do so.

 
So the discussion got me.  I actually went to look for information on this assault which has been under discussion.  Good lord.  On one side we have a person making statements, not legal defense arguments- but statements, against clear visual evidence to the contrary.   On the other side we have a hot house flower who insists that touching no more offensive than one would encounter on a trading floor of a commodities market or stock exchange floor, or in public transportation or nigh clubs for that matter, now be elevated to a criminal matter.

A pox on both their houses.
Dang.  I hope I don't bump into someone on the sidewalk today and get arrested.

 
I hate to interrupt the awesomeness of the Lewandowski assault and stripper-biting lawyer story, but no. It's not a legitimate point of discussion. The notion that we live in a post-racial America and that we should have policies that reflect it is total nonsense. Read the DOJ report on Ferguson, or any of the several longform articles that touched on how police prey on poor black communities to fund their departments. Read Coates' careful history of discrimination and familiarize yourself with things like redlining and predatory lending. Take a look at the obvious motivations behind those nonsensical voter ID laws. Or consider the Trump-led birther movement.

Higgs seems like a good guy so I assume his position that we we live in a post-racial America comes from ignorance of these things rather than something worse, but that doesn't make it legitimate or true to say that "we are all just Americans" or that arguments to the contrary depend entirely on things that ended a long time ago like slavery or Jim Crow laws.
Appreciate the readings, and I'll look at them.  I'vexslready done a lot of reading and study on this though.  I just think we have a difference of opinion on the depth of racism today, and what the most effective plans are to lift minorities out of the scourge of generational poverty.  I think it begins and ends with empowerment and not handouts, reparations, or identity politics that create a victim mentality.  And shame on my party for not presenting these empowering solutions to the minority communities better.  Because it makes it look like we don't care, and I know a lot of us do.

 
I'm going to tell you what's really bonkers about this, DFS, and it's not you.

Donald and his minions are currently making montages of that new security footage to DEFINITIVELY PROVE Fields is a crazy lying trollop. Same thing is going on with Amanda Carpenter.

But let's skip the facts and details.

Hillary was probably facing at least the legitimate accusation that she or one of hers would be arrested or indicted or (more likely) should have been. Now instead it's Donald who has had his actual campaign manager actually you know arrested. What is he going to do now, talk about illegality and the tolerance of it? Donald is obsessed with this issue - and Megyn Kelly and how he personally is treated ( :cry: ) - when Cruz just canned his guy for suggesting that Carson was dropping out and he moved right along. We've got like a million issues to talk about as a country and this is the stuff that Donald and his campaign waste time on. Meanwhile Hillary, Sanders, Cruz, and Kasich are chugging along, doing actual stuff. It's so insanely ridiculous. He just wastes time on this stuff. Just look at this thread. Half the team can't get off Square 1 because they're accused of being racist, the other half of the team is playing Jim Garrison with the man on the grassy knoll who really tugged on Fields' arm. Massive waste of time and resources.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Did he grab her arm ..yes...Did he commit battery, not proven...So for right now her claim of being battered has been made up.
By definition of the law grabbing someone, even touching someone without permission, is simple battery in Florida. Seems like a pretty low threshold to me but it is what it is. There were supposedly individual finger bruise marks on her arm as evidence as well.

 
I'm going to tell you what's really bonkers about this, DFS, and it's not you.

Donald and his minions are currently making montages of that new security footage to DEFINITIVELY PROVE Fields is a crazy lying trollop. Same thing is going on with Amanda Carpenter.

But let's skip the facts and details.

Hillary was probably facing at least the legitimate accusation that she or one of hers would be arrested or indicted or (more likely) should have been. Now instead it's Donald who has had his actual campaign manager actually you know arrested. What is he going to do now, talk about illegality and the tolerance of it? Donald is obsessed with this issue - and Megyn Kelly and how he personally is treated ( :cry: ) when Cruz just canned his guy for suggesting that Carson was dropping out and he moved right along. We've got like a million issues to talk about as a country and this is the stuff that Donald and his campaign waste time on. Meanwhile Hillary, Sanders, Cruz, and Kasich are chugging along, doing actual stuff. It's so insanely ridiculous. He just wastes time on this stuff. Half the team can't get off Square 1 because they're accused of being racist, the other half of the team is playing Jim Garrison with the man on the grassy knoll who really tugged on Fields' arm. Massive waste of time and resources.
I don't understand his whole Megyn Kelly thing.  Never have.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top