Trump and Bigotry: A False Association (2 Viewers)

[msommer]

Right: racism isn't a binary thing where either you're racist or you're not. There's a continuum of racism with all kinds of gradations.

I don't think there's any doubt that Trump is more racist than average. I do think there's pretty good evidence that he's not on the extreme end of the continuum. You can go to any mall and find people more racist than he is. And yet he's often portrayed as being on the extreme end -- with people associating him with the KKK and whatnot based on questionable evidence.

You can call him subtly racist and I don't think many would argue. But according to the Google, people are calling him "openly racist" more than three times as often as they are calling him "subtly racist" (about 70,000 results to about 23,000). The "openly racist" charge, however, is not nearly as well supported. I.e., people are overreaching, and the overreaching amounts to crying wolf.

How many are just calling him "racist" without the subtly/openly distinction?

 

[JIslander]

Does intent apply to racism?  It's a tricky thing, but I think so.

I believe that you think requiring a photo ID for voting is a good idea because it makes sense.  And I don't think you're racist for thinking that.  I also believe that there is a not-small set of people that think requiring a photo ID for voting is a good idea specifically because they think it will suppress the percentage of African Americans that are able to vote.  And that I would consider racist.

Not to mention, there was no basis of substantial fraud to begin with.

 

[lakerstan]

Black Lives Matter... no, all lives matter. When you focus on only one group the implication is they matter more than the rest.

Why do people in the BLM movement target and kill white cops? Harass people on social media for being white? I know personally I have been attacked countless times on twitter for being white and ridiculed as well. There is a lot of racism in the BLM movement and it is being ignored by the mainstream media. If it was a white group called white lives matter and they killed black cops and made racist comments on social media no doubt in my mind the media would be talking about how WLM is a white supremacist hate group that is very dangerous.

I'd love to see credible evidence of BLM killing cops, so please enlighten me.

I think you may misunderstand that group.  When they say, "Black Lives Matter", they are really saying "Black lives matter as much as white lives".  They do not feel they have been treated equally, so they are saying, "Hey - we matter too".  I don't think there is any supremacy indicated - just equality.

My guess is that you have not been attacked and ridiculed on Twitter for being white.  It is more likely your publishing of unpopular viewpoints rather than the color of your skin that is causing such ridicule.

 

[squistion]

I'd love to see credible evidence of BLM killing cops, so please enlighten me.

I think you may misunderstand that group.  When they say, "Black Lives Matter", they are really saying "Black lives matter as much as white lives".  They do not feel they have been treated equally, so they are saying, "Hey - we matter too".  I don't think there is any supremacy indicated - just equality.

My guess is that you have not been attacked and ridiculed on Twitter for being white.  It is more likely your publishing of unpopular viewpoints rather than the color of your skin that is causing such ridicule.

That. From their website:

http://blacklivesmatter.com/11-major-misconceptions-about-the-black-lives-matter-movement/

11 Major Misconceptions About the Black Lives Matter Movement

8. The movement hates white people. The statement “black lives matter” is not an anti-white proposition. Contained within the statement is an unspoken but implied “too,” as in “black lives matter, too,” which suggests that the statement is one of inclusion rather than exclusion. However, those white people who continue to mischaracterize the affirmation of the value of black life as being anti-white are suggesting that in order for white lives to matter, black lives cannot. That is a foundational premise of white supremacy. It is antithetical to what the Black Lives Matter movement stands for, which is the simple proposition that “black lives also matter.”

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

I don't know whether Trump is extremely racist. I doubt he has any strong convictions at all other than "money good, Trump good."

I do know that he is giving extremely racist people like Steve Bannon unprecedented access to broaden their white nationalist propaganda.

 

[The Commish]

Well, we made it through four pages of interesting conversation on racism and Trumpism without going completely off the rails.  So thats something, at least 

Is this what the Trump thread was like?  Did they at least provide bleach and steel wool for you to wash off with after leaving that thread?  Yikes!

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Is this what the Trump thread was like?  Did they at least provide bleach and steel wool for you to wash off with after leaving that thread?  Yikes!

'The Alias Wars were followed in succession by the Banning Times, and there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth.'

 

[ROCKET]

I love the hypocrisy of the first few lib posters in this thread stating that because Trump is a 70 something year old white man he must have some degree of racism and bigotry. Those statements themselves are racial, insensitive and bigoted.  Pot meet kettle.

 

[squistion]

Black Lives Matter... no, all lives matter. When you focus on only one group the implication is they matter more than the rest.

Why do people in the BLM movement target and kill white cops? Harass people on social media for being white? I know personally I have been attacked countless times on twitter for being white and ridiculed as well. There is a lot of racism in the BLM movement and it is being ignored by the mainstream media. If it was a white group called white lives matter and they killed black cops and made racist comments on social media no doubt in my mind the media would be talking about how WLM is a white supremacist hate group that is very dangerous.

Interesting. The only people I have ever seen being attacked on twitter for being white, was after expressing racist opinions or using hashtags like #WhiteLivesMatter 

https://twitter.com/hashtag/whitelivesmatter?src=hash.

To avoid starting another thread, I am not saying you expressed a racist opinion or used an offensive hashtag. But, as bad as twitter can be, one rarely sees people being randomly attacked just for their skin color, usually there was something they tweeted or was in their profile that prompted it. I would love to see the context of what caused you to be attacked "countless times" for being white.

 

[ilikedwight]

Interesting. The only people I have ever seen being attacked on twitter for being white, was after expressing racist opinions or using hashtags like #WhiteLivesMatter 

https://twitter.com/hashtag/whitelivesmatter?src=hash.

To avoid starting another thread, I am not saying you expressed a racist opinion or used an offensive hashtag. But, as bad as twitter can be, one rarely sees people being randomly attacked just for their skin color, usually there was something they tweeted or was in their profile that prompted it. I would love to see the context of what caused you to be attacked "countless times" for being white.

in other words, when a white person experiences racism "they were asking for it"

 

[skol asylum]

Can we have that evidence of BLM targeting and killing white cops please? We'll just sit here and wait.

:crickets:

 

[bosoxs45]

It looks like many Clinton supporters believe in the first model, and many Trump supporters in the second model. I think this ties into deeper differences – Clinton supporters are more atomized and individualist, Trump supporters stronger believers in culture and community

This is a totally false claim from him.

 

[Christo]

I do not know if Trump is racist.  But I know racists supported Trump over other candidates.  I would wonder why racists saw an attraction in Trump.  

It is clear that the alt-right movement, who supported Trump, was started by white supremacists (Richard Spencer), and while it has changed, a racist element still exists.

I posted this in the other thread:

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/03/29/an-establishment-conservatives-guide-to-the-alt-right/

Were they supposed to support Clinton?

 

[squistion]

in other words, when a white person experiences racism "they were asking for it"

No, not at all. Please. I was stating that there is usually an obvious reason for the response to something specifically they tweeted or that was in their profile - a cause and effect relationship. Minorities just don't randomly attack white people on twitter for no reason, it is usually in response to something they find offensive (whether rightfully or wrongfully).

And I have seen blacks and Latinos also attacked after expressing a racist or bigoted viewpoint - it is not just that white people are getting singled out, it happens to anyone who expresses a controversial viewpoint on race (or anything else for that matter).

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

Also, whether or not you believe Trump is a bigot, he associates himself with bigotry. He will continue to do so. He does not try to hide it.

That's what is so alarming. The alt-right *is* the right now. Trump gave them access. They're in.

For anyone who is as worried about this as they should be, call their insidious garbage out at every turn.

 

[jon_mx]

I could have put this in the Trump thread or in Koya's thread, but I think it's important enough for its own discussion.

You Are Still Crying Wolf

I am not going to copy and paste the article -- it has too many graphs, charts, and other images. Click on the link. There are no pop-up ads or anything.

Bill Maher and others have recently confessed that it was a mistake for Democrats to paint honorable men like John McCain and Mitt Romney as contemptible just because they were standard-issue Republicans. It amounted to crying wolf, and prevented people from heeding similar charges when a truly contemptible candidate like Donald Trump ran for office.

The article I've linked to argues that by trying to associate Trump or his supporters with racism or other forms of bigotry, we are still crying wolf. I find the article persuasive -- a lot more persuasive than I would have expected before reading it.

To my liberal friends worried that Trump's victory signals a growing acceptance of racism or other forms of bigotry in this country: Let's take solace in the evidence that there is no such growing acceptance, and that Trump himself is probably no more bigoted than your average 70-year-old white guy.

To the idiot racists who take Trump's victory as a license to demean or harass minorities: Stop. It is no such license. He's not on your side. Please crawl back under your rock.

The most sensible post I have read in weeks.   Thanks for bringing the voice of reason to this forum.  

 

[Statorama]

The problem with this analysis is those laws are motivated by a desire to disproportionately affect poor and black people.

Again, if the law said only black people or poor people have to show an ID, that's racist.

Asking EVERYONE to produce an ID...isn't that the definition of fair?  ESPECIALLY when the government is offering to provide those ID's for FREE?

This "calling everything racist" calls back to the original article.  If you take what's the fairest way to protect the sanctity of the vote and call it racist, people tend to ignore you when you point out true racist acts.

 

[jon_mx]

Also, whether or not you believe Trump is a bigot, he associates himself with bigotry. He will continue to do so. He does not try to hide it.

That's what is so alarming. The alt-right *is* the right now. Trump gave them access. They're in.

For anyone who is as worried about this as they should be, call their insidious garbage out at every turn.

There is no more to fear here than there was when the right was trying to link Obama with the Black Liberation Theology, Black Panthers, or Black Lives Matter.  There are always supporters and associates who are more radical than the candidate.   But to try to define the candidate by these most radical elements is fear-mongering.   Keep up the fear-mongering so we know to ignore you.  

 

[timschochet]

There is no more to fear here than there was when the right was trying to link Obama with the Black Liberation Theology, Black Panthers, or Black Lives Matter.  There are always supporters and associates who are more radical than the candidate.   But to try to define the candidate by these most radical elements is fear-mongering.   Keep up the fear-mongering so we know to ignore you.  

This is the same comparison Joe Bryant made and I found it offensive by him and I find it offensive by you. The proof of Trump's racist comments come from his own mouth, not from associations. Among other things:

1. He called Mexicans rapists and murderers.

2. He said that he watched thousands of Muslims in New Jersey celebrate 9/11

3. He called for a ban on all Muslims coming into the United States.

4. He accused the judge in the Trump University trial of being against him because the judge was a Mexican.

There are no comparable Obama statements. Not one. There are no comparable statements by ANY modern candidate for President. This is not business as usual. This is not both sides does it. Donald Trump ran a UNIQUELY racist and bigoted campaign in which he attempted to stoke the fears of white Americans and it worked. And it's wrong and insulting to try now to pretend that it was nromal or didn't happen.

 

[Bruce Dickinson]

Again, if the law said only black people or poor people have to show an ID, that's racist.

Asking EVERYONE to produce an ID...isn't that the definition of fair?  ESPECIALLY when the government is offering to provide those ID's for FREE?

This "calling everything racist" calls back to the original article.  If you take what's the fairest way to protect the sanctity of the vote and call it racist, people tend to ignore you when you point out true racist acts.

It's more than just voter IDs, though.  Lack of protection from Voting Rights Act allowed Republican-controlled state legislatures to close hundreds of polling places without replacement, targeting minority neighborhoods for the closings with what the courts called almost surgical precision.  

 

[Christo]

This is the same comparison Joe Bryant made and I found it offensive by him and I find it offensive by you. The proof of Trump's racist comments come from his own mouth, not from associations. Among other things:

1. He called Mexicans rapists and murderers.

2. He said that he watched thousands of Muslims in New Jersey celebrate 9/11

3. He called for a ban on all Muslims coming into the United States.

4. He accused the judge in the Trump University trial of being against him because the judge was a Mexican.

There are no comparable Obama statements. Not one. There are no comparable statements by ANY modern candidate for President. This is not business as usual. This is not both sides does it. Donald Trump ran a UNIQUELY racist and bigoted campaign in which he attempted to stoke the fears of white Americans and it worked. And it's wrong and insulting to try now to pretend that it was nromal or didn't happen.

Oh, tim

 

[jon_mx]

This is the same comparison Joe Bryant made and I found it offensive by him and I find it offensive by you. The proof of Trump's racist comments come from his own mouth, not from associations. Among other things:

1. He called Mexicans rapists and murderers.

2. He said that he watched thousands of Muslims in New Jersey celebrate 9/11

3. He called for a ban on all Muslims coming into the United States.

4. He accused the judge in the Trump University trial of being against him because the judge was a Mexican.

There are no comparable Obama statements. Not one. There are no comparable statements by ANY modern candidate for President. This is not business as usual. This is not both sides does it. Donald Trump ran a UNIQUELY racist and bigoted campaign in which he attempted to stoke the fears of white Americans and it worked. And it's wrong and insulting to try now to pretend that it was nromal or didn't happen.

You mistake being very unpolished and brash with racism.   Trump is not a politician and does not caveat his statement or phrase them very well.  Actually, I would say the exact same thing about you.  You over generalize all the time and rarely caveat statements as much as you should.   That is why you piss a lot of people here off.  

 

[Loan Sharks]

The good is clearly a small subset (if it, in his mind, it even exists) of all the immigrants.

Is that subset bigger of smaller than the subset of non bigoted 70 year old white men in your mind?

 

[Loan Sharks]

That's pretty biased/bigoted, though. The world has moved on from those values

Nice!

 

[Loan Sharks]

This is the same comparison Joe Bryant made and I found it offensive by him and I find it offensive by you. The proof of Trump's racist comments come from his own mouth, not from associations. Among other things:

1. He called Mexicans rapists and murderers.

2. He said that he watched thousands of Muslims in New Jersey celebrate 9/11

3. He called for a ban on all Muslims coming into the United States.

4. He accused the judge in the Trump University trial of being against him because the judge was a Mexican.

There are no comparable Obama statements. Not one. There are no comparable statements by ANY modern candidate for President. This is not business as usual. This is not both sides does it. Donald Trump ran a UNIQUELY racist and bigoted campaign in which he attempted to stoke the fears of white Americans and it worked. And it's wrong and insulting to try now to pretend that it was nromal or didn't happen.

Nonsense. 

 

[JIslander]

You mistake being very unpolished and brash with racism.   Trump is not a politician and does not caveat his statement or phrase them very well.  Actually, I would say the exact same thing about you.  You over generalize all the time and rarely caveat statements as much as you should.   That is why you piss a lot of people here off.  

Yes, a polished racism would be much better. Maybe in 4 years with Bannon, he'll have it down pat.

 

[skol asylum]

This is the same comparison Joe Bryant made and I found it offensive by him and I find it offensive by you. The proof of Trump's racist comments come from his own mouth, not from associations. Among other things:

1. He called Mexicans rapists and murderers.

2. He said that he watched thousands of Muslims in New Jersey celebrate 9/11

3. He called for a ban on all Muslims coming into the United States.

4. He accused the judge in the Trump University trial of being against him because the judge was a Mexican.

There are no comparable Obama statements. Not one. There are no comparable statements by ANY modern candidate for President. This is not business as usual. This is not both sides does it. Donald Trump ran a UNIQUELY racist and bigoted campaign in which he attempted to stoke the fears of white Americans and it worked. And it's wrong and insulting to try now to pretend that it was nromal or didn't happen.

Post of the 2016 campaign year.

 

[skol asylum]

You mistake being very unpolished and brash with racism.   Trump is not a politician and does not caveat his statement or phrase them very well.  Actually, I would say the exact same thing about you.  You over generalize all the time and rarely caveat statements as much as you should.   That is why you piss a lot of people here off.  

Oh bull####. Trump doesn't get that pass. No f'n way.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I haven't had a chance to read this yet, but I really like Slate Star Codex.  He publishes good stuff on a regular basis.

 

[Loan Sharks]

Denial is real.

Kinda like "Not my President" denial. 

 

[Loan Sharks]

Oh bull####. Trump doesn't get that pass. No f'n way.

That's President Trump.

 

[skol asylum]

That's President Trump.

Not yet.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Again, I'm a fan of Scott Alexander.  He does good work.

Having said that, I read this post like I would a meta-study showing that so-and-so only found a p=0.80 relationship between racism and whatever while someother-and-someother found and a p=0.85 and and twenty other folks found a p of 0.75.  Sure, there are some folks involved in all of this that are totally non-racist, but I have a hard time believing the guy up top is not tapping into racist sentiments.  The Bill Clinton photo linked to in the article seems to suggest that this works. "Openly racist' okay this is maybe not quite right.   But you get the idea.

 

[whoknew]

Again, if the law said only black people or poor people have to show an ID, that's racist.

Asking EVERYONE to produce an ID...isn't that the definition of fair?  ESPECIALLY when the government is offering to provide those ID's for FREE?

This "calling everything racist" calls back to the original article.  If you take what's the fairest way to protect the sanctity of the vote and call it racist, people tend to ignore you when you point out true racist acts.

When you enact a law that will disproportionately negatively affect black people because you want to negatively affect them, that is racist. Just because there is a small number of white people that are also negatively affected doesn't mean the intent nor the effect are not racist.

 

[WisWolvrns]

Not talking "politically correct" <> being racist

However, the opposite seems to be the underlying thread nowadays.  If Trump said something that wasn't politically correct, boom, he is racist.   The word really is being misused and much of it is because the media/entertainment industry is doubling down on bad mouthing Trump.

Obama was elected by a lot of whites voting for him.  Many switched over and voted for Trump this time over Clinton.  How that can be deemed racist is crazy talk. 

Overall as a country this media and democrat driven divide between whites and blacks can't end well if they continue on with it.   Trump said he will be working toward creating living wage jobs and did not specify for just white people.  They will be for all ethnic, religious and political Americans.  Heck, he hasn't even taken office yet and it's a media shet storm trying to worry about this and worry about that and make accusations everywhere to try and keep everyone divided instead of trying to bring everyone together and give the guy a chance.

All the campaigning rhetoric was just that.  The Clinton campaign dished out their fair share and in this election Trump did what other republican candidates haven't, in dishing it right back and upping the ante.  He fought fire with fire.  It turned out a success and now he is moving forward and in speeches so far and moving away from all the campaign rhetoric.

 

[WisWolvrns]

When you enact a law that will disproportionately negatively affect black people because you want to negatively affect them, that is racist. Just because there is a small number of white people that are also negatively affected doesn't mean the intent nor the effect are not racist.

Not sure how anyone can say having a voter ID can disproportionately negatively effect anyone.  They would be free and everyone would get one.  Pretty simple. 

Anyone who drives gets a drivers license and no one is up in arms about requiring that.  People buying alcohol typically need ID and no one questions that.  Having voting rights be on par with those items seems pretty common sense to me.

 

[JIslander]

Not sure how anyone can say having a voter ID can disproportionately negatively effect anyone.  They would be free and everyone would get one.  Pretty simple. 

Anyone who drives gets a drivers license and no one is up in arms about requiring that.  People buying alcohol typically need ID and no one questions that.  Having voting rights be on par with those items seems pretty common sense to me.

Here's the thing. We, as a Nation, should be doing the opposite and making it EASIER for people to vote not more difficult. Sure requiring an ID  sounds like no big deal, but there are folks who don't drive, live a distance away from polling places, which got worse this year with 800 being shut down because of the voters rights act issues. In NC, it was found the suppression in multiple ways was found to target minorities with a surgical precison. Makes me sick.

 

[Loan Sharks]

Here's the thing. We, as a Nation, should be doing the opposite and making it EASIER for people to vote not more difficult. Sure requiring an ID  sounds like no big deal, but there are folks who don't drive, live a distance away from polling places, which got worse this year with 800 being shut down because of the voters rights act issues. 

We should make it easier, it is practically impossible to vote now. Soooooo hard to vote. 

 

[JIslander]

We should make it easier, it is practically impossible to vote now. Soooooo hard to vote. 

You should get out of your bubble more.

 

[Loan Sharks]

You should get out of your bubble more.

Getting out of my bubble is exactly as hard as voting. 

 

[JIslander]

Getting out of my bubble is exactly as hard as voting. 

Nah, by that answer,  you're still in your bubble. Try harder.

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

When you enact a law that will disproportionately negatively affect black people because you want to negatively affect them, that is racist. Just because there is a small number of white people that are also negatively affected doesn't mean the intent nor the effect are not racist.

Here's a good article explaining how ID laws disproportionately affect minority, poor, and elderly voters.  

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/getting-a-photo-id-so-you-can-vote-is-easy-unless-youre-poor-black-latino-or-elderly/2016/05/23/8d5474ec-20f0-11e6-8690-f14ca9de2972_story.html

 

[WisWolvrns]

the concept of voter ID is not the issue.  how to get your voting ID is the problem of that article you referenced.  some of which is unwarranted because some level of accountability is needed from individuals to make sure they are citizens.   however, it should be free, and if it was a lot of that article's issues go away.  

if states require $ to get a voter ID card either directly or by nature of the proof they are requiring to determine citizenship, then we are in agreement.

one should not need to jump through hoops to get an official voter ID, but enough proof should be required to confirm the person getting a voter ID is a US citizen.  so both the government and individual have to meet halfway and checks would need to be in place so everyone only gets one voter ID.

how US citizenship is determined seems to be the core issue

 

[cobalt_27]

I could have put this in the Trump thread or in Koya's thread, but I think it's important enough for its own discussion.

You Are Still Crying Wolf

I am not going to copy and paste the article -- it has too many graphs, charts, and other images. Click on the link. There are no pop-up ads or anything.

Bill Maher and others have recently confessed that it was a mistake for Democrats to paint honorable men like John McCain and Mitt Romney as contemptible just because they were standard-issue Republicans. It amounted to crying wolf, and prevented people from heeding similar charges when a truly contemptible candidate like Donald Trump ran for office.

The article I've linked to argues that by trying to associate Trump or his supporters with racism or other forms of bigotry, we are still crying wolf. I find the article persuasive -- a lot more persuasive than I would have expected before reading it.

To my liberal friends worried that Trump's victory signals a growing acceptance of racism or other forms of bigotry in this country: Let's take solace in the evidence that there is no such growing acceptance, and that Trump himself is probably no more bigoted than your average 70-year-old white guy.

To the idiot racists who take Trump's victory as a license to demean or harass minorities: Stop. It is no such license. He's not on your side. Please crawl back under your rock.

Excellent article.  A lot to chew on.  I'm not ready to say I subscribe to the main thesis, let alone all his points.  But, it sure makes me think seriously about my premises.  

 

[cobalt_27]

Again, I'm a fan of Scott Alexander.  He does good work.

Having said that, I read this post like I would a meta-study showing that so-and-so only found a p=0.80 relationship between racism and whatever while someother-and-someother found and a p=0.85 and and twenty other folks found a p of 0.75.  Sure, there are some folks involved in all of this that are totally non-racist, but I have a hard time believing the guy up top is not tapping into racist sentiments.  The Bill Clinton photo linked to in the article seems to suggest that this works. "Openly racist' okay this is maybe not quite right.   But you get the idea.

That's a really good analogy.  Was trying to come up with something like this but never quite nailed it the way you did.

 

[Jrodicus]

A Poll of North Carolina from August:

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/04/12-million-americans-believe-lizard-people-run-our-country/316706/

We all know how accurate the polls are...they did such a great job at predicting this past election.

 

[Statorama]

When you enact a law that will disproportionately negatively affect black people

I would strongly disagree that Voter ID disproportionately negatively affects black people, or ANY people that currently do not have an ID that would be given one.  In fact, I would argue that providing a FREE ID to people that do not currently have one disproportionately POSITIVELY affects them.  They would have a ton of doors opened that weren't open before.  They would be able to open a bank account, apply for a mortgage, apply for medicare, apply for social security, apply for a job (or unemployment), rent or buy a car, adopt a pet, rent a hotel room...and on and on and on. Voter ID ensures that votes cast were valid, and it provides all kinds of new benefits for those that would get free ID's.

 

[Workhorse]

I’m not saying Trump doesn’t have some racist attitudes and policies. I am saying that talk of “entire campaign built around white supremacy” and “the white power candidate” is deliberate and dangerous exaggeration.

What's truly amazing about that article can be summed up in these two sentences, focusing FAR more on the "dangers" of the second sentence as opposed to the first one.  The first sentence should be an automatic disqualifier to lead the country.

 

[msommer]

What's truly amazing about that article can be summed up in these two sentences, focusing FAR more on the "dangers" of the second sentence as opposed to the first one.  The first sentence should be an automatic disqualifier to lead the country.

It apparently isn't, not that the people who voted for Trump, in ANY way, shape or form should or even could be considered to share his values, at all. Not one of them. Obviously. Duh.

 

[Weebs210]

Msommer continues to complain about racsim while being extremely racist againat whites. Nice job man.