What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Trump on "Very Fine People" on both sides (1 Viewer)

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
I'm guessing this has been talked about a lot already but didn't see it easily.

I was a little surprised to see Joe Biden's announcement make Trump's "Very Fine People" on both sides the centerpiece.

Clearly, that was an awful thing to say but I thought it had been clarified.

Quick google return:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/03/21/trump_didnt_call_neo-nazis_fine_people_heres_proof_139815.html

“Excuse me, they didn’t put themselves down as neo-Nazis, and you had some very bad people in that group.  But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides.  You had people in that group – excuse me, excuse me, I saw the same pictures you did.  You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.”

After another question at that press conference, Trump became even more explicit:

“I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and white nationalists because they should be condemned totally.” 
Am I getting this wrong?

I'm asking this primarily as it relates to Biden. Seems odd he'd choose focus on that when it seems to be a case of misspeaking. 

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
As it relates to people protesting removing Confederate Civil War statues, I am in favor of removing them. 

But I do know people who are in favor of not removing them and not changing the names of parks and I call them friends and overall "very fine" people.

We disagree on how we should display statues but I don't label them as reprehensible people. 

 

SaintsInDome2006

Footballguy
The problem is in the facts of what happened. That was a far right gathering, not a gathering about protesting statues. Trump misrepresented the situation. I’m sick and tired as everyone should be of the argument that Trump is too foolish (polite version, sorry, yes, that’s the defense of him by his supporters), too venal, too narcissistic, too clumsy in his explanations, too addled to understand what’s going on. Same argument just got Don Jr off the hook in the Trump Tower meeting in the Mueller report. At some point after repeated instances that doesn’t fly.

 

TobiasFunke

Footballguy
From Wikipedia about the event:

"The organizers' stated goals included unifying the American white nationalist movement and to oppose removing a statue of Robert E. Lee from Charlottesville's Lee Park."

Anyone who joined up with these folks was, at a minimum, marching shoulder to shoulder with literal Nazis for their common cause, listening or joining in literal Nazi chants about blood and soil and not being "replaced."  They heard that and they kept on marching shoulder to shoulder. Whether they actually believe in the tenets of national socialism isn't particularly meaningful to me at that point and it shouldn't be meaningful to anyone else. 

There is only one acceptable response to a white supremacist movement, and that is unconditional condemnation of it and anyone and everyone who associates with it in any way.  I understand it might be hard for straight white Christians to see it that way because you haven't had the "never again" message drilled into your head from childhood, which is reasonable. But there's no room for hedging and nuance on this because that is how the movement gathers steam.  "I'm not a Nazi but they have some good points on some issues" doesn't play. It's not OK for a regular citizen, and it's way beyond the pale for the President of the United States to defend it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

SaintsInDome2006

Footballguy
As it relates to people protesting removing Confederate Civil War statues, I am in favor of removing them. 

But I do know people who are in favor of not removing them and not changing the names of parks and I call them friends and overall "very fine" people.

We disagree on how we should display statues but I don't label them as reprehensible people. 
I live in New Orleans. I can take you to a monument for Confederate dead in 5 minutes. Jeff Davis was buried here. I can talk for 3 hours on this. I fact Joe instead of the Confrderate museum here the WW2 museum is a much more appropriate place for the discussion. Similarly It’s a subject for another thread.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

timschochet

Footballguy
As it relates to people protesting removing Confederate Civil War statues, I am in favor of removing them. 

But I do know people who are in favor of not removing them and not changing the names of parks and I call them friends and overall "very fine" people.

We disagree on how we should display statues but I don't label them as reprehensible people. 
Trump’s disingenuous clarification that he was not referring to neo-Nazis came way after the fact, following several days of either refusal to clarify or wink wink nudge nudge hints that he was in fact referring to neo-Nazis. This is Trump’s formula, same as when he attacked the handicapped guy, same as when he attacked Khan’s wife, and dozens of other examples. He’ll say very inflammatory things to rile up his supporters and make the media’s heads explode and then attempt to clarify it later. 

 

msommer

Footballguy
From Wikipedia about the event:

"The organizers' stated goals included unifying the American white nationalist movement and to oppose removing a statue of Robert E. Lee from Charlottesville's Lee Park."

Anyone who joined up with these folks was, at a minimum, marching shoulder to shoulder with literal Nazis for their common cause, listening or joining in literal Nazi chants about blood and soil and not being "replaced."  They heard that and they kept on marching shoulder to shoulder. Whether they actually believe in the tenets of national socialism isn't particularly meaningful to me at that point and it shouldn't be meaningful to anyone else. 
:goodposting:

 

Sinn Fein

Footballguy
Yes, we should remove the statues/monuments. 

Yes, Trump was misinterpreted when he said there are fine people on both sides of that argument.  (It was a tone-deaf statement by Trump - who doubled down on it - but the original statement referred to people supporting the monument - they are misguided and wrong, but some are, indeed, fine people.

Yes, I think, Biden was wrong to lead with this message.  Its divisive and backward-looking.  It reminds me why I don't want Trump as President - but that was true long before the video.

 

JuniorNB

Footballguy
I'm guessing this has been talked about a lot already but didn't see it easily.

I was a little surprised to see Joe Biden's announcement make Trump's "Very Fine People" on both sides the centerpiece.

Clearly, that was an awful thing to say but I thought it had been clarified.

Quick google return:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/03/21/trump_didnt_call_neo-nazis_fine_people_heres_proof_139815.html

Am I getting this wrong?

I'm asking this primarily as it relates to Biden. Seems odd he'd choose focus on that when it seems to be a case of misspeaking. 
This is what Trump always does. He says or does something hateful, racist, or evil, then sees the outrage and has PR people tell him to backtrack and say he meant something else. He definitely said that there were fine people on the Nazi's side. Another example is when he mocked the crippled guy.

 

Skoo

Footballguy
As it relates to people protesting removing Confederate Civil War statues, I am in favor of removing them. 

But I do know people who are in favor of not removing them and not changing the names of parks and I call them friends and overall "very fine" people.

We disagree on how we should display statues but I don't label them as reprehensible people. 
Here's the thing:

Wanting to keep a statue up doesn't make you reprehensible.

Marching with Neo-Nazis who are wielding weapons and chanting "The Jews will not replace us" does.

Seriously, what kind of "very fine person" sees that and doesn't immediately walk in the other direction?

 

timschochet

Footballguy
Yes, we should remove the statues/monuments. 

Yes, Trump was misinterpreted when he said there are fine people on both sides of that argument.  (It was a tone-deaf statement by Trump - who doubled down on it - but the original statement referred to people supporting the monument - they are misguided and wrong, but some are, indeed, fine people.
This is incorrect as well. Trump was not misinterpreted. 

 

Ruffrodys05

IBL Representative
So the key error here is, @Joe Bryant, that you are indeed getting this wrong. You apparently took President Trump at his word that he misspoke about this. President Trump was lying; he did not misspeak. He meant to say that some neo Nazis are very fine people. 
Yep, DJT meant what he said and didn't clarify an alternate stance until a number of days had passed.

 

SaintsInDome2006

Footballguy
Seriously, I'm not looking to discuss. I'm asking if you'd be in favor of removing. 
Which one, Joe? The RE Lee statue? Yes, though I thought the process Landrieu used here was awful. The Liberty Monument? That should have gone before the Lee monument. 

Totally irrelevant to this discussion.

 

Sinn Fein

Footballguy
This is incorrect as well. Trump was not misinterpreted. 
:shrug:

I think he was.  Obviously I don't like Trump - but I think the most likely interpretation of his remarks is that he was referring to people who wanted to save the statues.  I doubt that Trump had the facts before he spoke.  I doubt that he understood the ramifications of the white nationalist movement.  I simply don't think he is that smart, nor observant.

 

[scooter]

Footballguy
Biden is making a mistake by making this a centerpiece of his campaign. It's Deplorables 2.0.

I agree that Trump did not misspeak. I agree that Trump sympathizes with white nationalists. But the statues are a complex issue that requires a subtle balance that a guy like Biden is not capable of pulling off. 

Also, IT WAS NEARLY TWO YEARS AGO. Why not focus on the thousands of terrible things Trump has said or done SINCE THEN??

 

Sinn Fein

Footballguy
Without trying to side track the discussion - I found Trump's actual quote:

“Excuse me, they didn’t put themselves down as neo-Nazis, and you had some very bad people in that group.  But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides.  You had people in that group – excuse me, excuse me, I saw the same pictures you did.  You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.”

I stick with my analysis that Trump was under-informed about the rally - and that his quote, actually refers to people he thought were simply there to preserve southern heritage (Which I think is borderline just as bad - but many fine people disagree with me on this one...)

 

jomar

Footballguy
:shrug:

I think he was.  Obviously I don't like Trump - but I think the most likely interpretation of his remarks is that he was referring to people who wanted to save the statues.  I doubt that Trump had the facts before he spoke.  I doubt that he understood the ramifications of the white nationalist movement.  I simply don't think he is that smart, nor observant.
I don't think I've ever come across someone who is misinterpreted more than Trump.  this is what happens when words no longer have meaning.  Trump actually said that he was talking about the people in the pictures from Charlottesville when he said there was fine people on both sides.  the people in the pictures were carrying torches and chanting 'jews will not replace us'.  now somehow, the excuse is that Trump was talking about all people who support keeping the statues, not just the people at this rally.  but listen to his actual words, he was very specifically referring to the people at that rally, some of them were fine people.

 

timschochet

Footballguy
How do you know?
Pattern. 

The handicapped guy, the Mexican Judge, Khan’s wife, “####hole countries”,  black woman isn’t smart enough to be governor of Georgia- shall I go on? I could, all day in fact. Am I supposed to believe that “very fine people”  was the ONE TIME that I should take Trump at his word, that he didn’t mean to deliberately make a bigoted remark? OK. 

 

Sinn Fein

Footballguy
I don't think I've ever come across someone who is misinterpreted more than Trump.  this is what happens when words no longer have meaning.  Trump actually said that he was talking about the people in the pictures from Charlottesville when he said there was fine people on both sides.  the people in the pictures were carrying torches and chanting 'jews will not replace us'.  now somehow, the excuse is that Trump was talking about all people who support keeping the statues, not just the people at this rally.  but listen to his actual words, he was very specifically referring to the people at that rally, some of them were fine people.
I put his quote right above this.

Again, I think Trump is not ver smart.  I am comfortable that he likely had no idea what was in the pictures, or the background of the rally.  I think he enjoys the support of whit nationalism, and I think he promotes values that keep white nationalists in the forefront.

But, on this particular topic - I think the people are imputing knowledge to Trump - that they themselves know he likely does not have.

 

SaintsInDome2006

Footballguy
I stick with my analysis that Trump was under-informed about the rally - and that his quote, actually refers to people he thought were simply there to preserve southern heritage (Which I think is borderline just as bad - but many fine people disagree with me on this one...)
I'm in favor of using the word 'weird' more often with Trump.

I think his referring to his dad as having been born in Germany is a good example. What is that? This is a guy who if he has a version of the truth which has utilitarian value to him he uses it. He's branding and sales pitch first, above all other things. 

I'm not even sure Trump understands neonazis or far right extremism, what it is. He gets Hitler and film reels of nazi marches, but does he even understand what was going on there? I really don't know. You cannot tell with him.

 

TobiasFunke

Footballguy
Pattern. 

The handicapped guy, the Mexican Judge, Khan’s wife, “####hole countries”,  black woman isn’t smart enough to be governor of Georgia- shall I go on? I could, all day in fact. Am I supposed to believe that “very fine people”  was the ONE TIME that I should take Trump at his word, that he didn’t mean to deliberately make a bigoted remark? OK. 
Also, consider how a normal person would respond if they were told that their comments were being "misinterpreted" as supportive of white supremacists by lots of people including the white supremacists themselves. Or how they'd respond if they found out that white supremacists had aligned themselves with your political movement and were treating you as their long-awaited savior. Or that people were sending horrifying violent threats to your political opponents and journalists with references to gas chambers and lampshades. Or that you'd "unwittingly" amplified the messages of white supremacists on twitter by retweeting them and their lies.

Imagine the lengths that any semi-decent human being would go to in order to disassociate themselves from the movement and condemn it at every possible turn if these things happened to them. 

Now look at how Trump has responded to those things.

 

Skoo

Footballguy
I put his quote right above this.

Again, I think Trump is not ver smart.  I am comfortable that he likely had no idea what was in the pictures, or the background of the rally.  I think he enjoys the support of whit nationalism, and I think he promotes values that keep white nationalists in the forefront.

But, on this particular topic - I think the people are imputing knowledge to Trump - that they themselves know he likely does not have.


I'm in favor of using the word 'weird' more often with Trump.

I think his referring to his dad as having been born in Germany is a good example. What is that? This is a guy who if he has a version of the truth which has utilitarian value to him he uses it. He's branding and sales pitch first, above all other things. 

I'm not even sure Trump understands neonazis or far right extremism, what it is. He gets Hitler and film reels of nazi marches, but does he even understand what was going on there? I really don't know. You cannot tell with him.
I think you're both giving him a pass here.

Either of you watch the video recently?

He doesn't just defend them, he desperately defends them. Because he knows they're on his side and he feels the need to defend his team.

When he was given the chance to denounce White Nationalism after the recent shooting in NZ?

Trump, whose own previous responses to the movement have drawn scrutiny, expressed sympathy for the victims who died at “places of worship turned into scenes of evil killing.” But he declined to join expressions of mounting concern about white nationalism, saying “I don’t, really” when asked whether he thought it was a rising threat around the world.

“I think it’s a small group of people that have very, very serious problems, I guess,” Trump said. “If you look at what happened in New Zealand, perhaps that’s the case. I don’t know enough about it yet. But it’s certainly a terrible thing.”

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/after-new-zealand-massacre-trump-downplays-white-nationalism-threat

 
Last edited by a moderator:

msommer

Footballguy
Without trying to side track the discussion - I found Trump's actual quote:

“Excuse me, they didn’t put themselves down as neo-Nazis, and you had some very bad people in that group.  But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides.  You had people in that group – excuse me, excuse me, I saw the same pictures you did.  You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.”

I stick with my analysis that Trump was under-informed about the rally - and that his quote, actually refers to people he thought were simply there to preserve southern heritage (Which I think is borderline just as bad - but many fine people disagree with me on this one...)
@TobiasFunke wrote earlier in the thread about those people in charlottesville that night

Anyone who joined up with these folks was, at a minimum, marching shoulder to shoulder with literal Nazis for their common cause, listening or joining in literal Nazi chants about blood and soil and not being "replaced."  They heard that and they kept on marching shoulder to shoulder. Whether they actually believe in the tenets of national socialism isn't particularly meaningful to me at that point and it shouldn't be meaningful to anyone else.
So, there are the very fine people, chanting "Jews will not replace us"

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
Without trying to side track the discussion - I found Trump's actual quote:

“Excuse me, they didn’t put themselves down as neo-Nazis, and you had some very bad people in that group.  But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides.  You had people in that group – excuse me, excuse me, I saw the same pictures you did.  You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.”

I stick with my analysis that Trump was under-informed about the rally - and that his quote, actually refers to people he thought were simply there to preserve southern heritage (Which I think is borderline just as bad - but many fine people disagree with me on this one...)
Thanks. That's been my interpretation too. 

Which made Biden making it the centerpiece of his announcement seem super weird. 

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
Which one, Joe? The RE Lee statue? Yes, though I thought the process Landrieu used here was awful. The Liberty Monument? That should have gone before the Lee monument. 

Totally irrelevant to this discussion.
Thanks. I mean either one. I thought from your post you meant you were in favor or not removing them. And you're clearly a "very fine" person. So that was completely relevant. I wasn't asking for discussion on it. 

 

SaintsInDome2006

Footballguy
I think you're both giving him a pass here.

Either of you watch the video recently?

He doesn't just defend them, he desperately defends them. Because he knows their on his side and he feels the need to defend his team.

When he was given the chance to denounce White Nationalism after the recent shooting in NZ?

Trump, whose own previous responses to the movement have drawn scrutiny, expressed sympathy for the victims who died at “places of worship turned into scenes of evil killing.” But he declined to join expressions of mounting concern about white nationalism, saying “I don’t, really” when asked whether he thought it was a rising threat around the world.

“I think it’s a small group of people that have very, very serious problems, I guess,” Trump said. “If you look at what happened in New Zealand, perhaps that’s the case. I don’t know enough about it yet. But it’s certainly a terrible thing.”

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/after-new-zealand-massacre-trump-downplays-white-nationalism-threat
I'm taking your comment to heart and I'm thinking about it. I myself have described him as a nationalist. I think he has ideology and it's implicit.

But I'm really talking about how his mind works.

I think the story about Sec DHS Nielsen and Russian interference is similar. Out of sight, out of mind.

How about McGahn's testimony. It's supported by Rob Porter. Not for Trump, he says it never happened. It happened.

Let's say - purely hypothetically - after Charlottesville Trump's staff had a briefing with him. Sat him down. Patiently explained world war 2, the runup, and then also a further discussion about the Civil War and reconstruction and Jim Crow.  Then let's say they explained the details of what happened in Charlottesville, who held the march, who was there. Just assume FTSOA he has the patience to sit for this and absorb it.

Now imagine just after that briefing Trump appearing in a press conference. Does he actually convey these points to the American people? Or does he reach for the handy stick of self defense and just convert the facts to his favorable version of reality anyway? I think the latter. I guess I'm saying his nationalism is purely narcissistic. It's man (himself) above party above nation above issues of good or evil, right or wrong. For Trump it's l'etat c'est Trump. The man reimagines fact in his own mind to fit his desires. I don't mind fitting nationalism or white nationalism into all of that, that's the practical result and yes I think that his comments on NZ and Charlottesville are effectively white nationalism and the mechanism I think still works this way.

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
@TobiasFunke wrote earlier in the thread about those people in charlottesville that night

So, there are the very fine people, chanting "Jews will not replace us"
I don't think anyone is saying that. Including Trump.

“I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and white nationalists because they should be condemned totally.” 


Now if one wants to make the case he's lying and doesn't mean what he says, that's something else. But as far as the words people are actually saying, this is pretty clear. 

 

SaintsInDome2006

Footballguy
Thanks. I mean either one. I thought from your post you meant you were in favor or not removing them. And you're clearly a "very fine" person. So that was completely relevant. I wasn't asking for discussion on it. 
I can't explain for you how complex this discussion is for me, for everyone in this city. There are 500 confederate statues and street names at least here. We have a French and Spanish legacy of slavery here on top of that. We have a poboy restaurant in an old slavery auction house. I'm not in favor of removing every one of them. There were 4 statues at issue here, I wasn't in favor of removing all 4 and I wasn't in favor of how Landrieu did Lee.

Mitch Landrieu had a relative lynched here but guess what he wasn't black (though Landrieu I think does share some creole heritage) he was Sicilian. It's so complicated that it makes me want to guzzle coffee or beer at 1000 in the am. 

However my point is this very discussion falls into the rhetorical fallacy that Trump played into. That's the problem. I don't think you're even hearing this point I'm making?

 
Last edited by a moderator:

msommer

Footballguy
From Wikipedia about the event:

"The organizers' stated goals included unifying the American white nationalist movement and to oppose removing a statue of Robert E. Lee from Charlottesville's Lee Park."Anyone who joined up with these folks was, at a minimum, marching shoulder to shoulder with literal Nazis for their common cause, listening or joining in literal Nazi chants about blood and soil and not being "replaced."  They heard that and they kept on marching shoulder to shoulder. Whether they actually believe in the tenets of national socialism isn't particularly meaningful to me at that point and it shouldn't be meaningful to anyone else. 

There is only one acceptable response to a white supremacist movement, and that is unconditional condemnation of it and anyone and everyone who associates with it in any way.  I understand it might be hard for straight white Christians to see it that way because you haven't had the "never again" message drilled into your head from childhood, which is reasonable. But there's no room for hedging and nuance on this because that is how the movement gathers steam.  "I'm not a Nazi but they have some good points on some issues" doesn't play. It's not OK for a regular citizen, and it's way beyond the pale for the President of the United States to defend it.


I don't think anyone is saying that. Including Trump.

Now if one wants to make the case he's lying and doesn't mean what he says, that's something else. But as far as the words people are actually saying, this is pretty clear. 
Bolded in @TobiasFunke's post 

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
I can't explain for you how complex this discussion is for me, for everyone in this city. There are 500 statues and street names at least here. I'm not in favor of removing every one of them. There were 4 statues at issue here, I wasn't in favor of removing all 4 and I wasn't in favor of how Landrieu did Lee.

Mitch Landrieu had a relative lynched here but guess what he wasn't black (though Landrieu I think does share some creole heritage) he was Sicilian. It's so complicated that it makes me want to guzzle coffee or beer at 1000 in the am. 

However my point is this very discussion falls into the rhetorical fallacy that Trump played in. That's the problem.
And that proves the point. It IS complex. And I believe fine people can be on the side of not removing every statue or reference or street sign. That's my only point. And that one is pretty simple. 

 

[scooter]

Footballguy
“I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and white nationalists

because they should be condemned totally.” 

Now if one wants to make the case he's lying and doesn't mean what he says, that's something else. But as far as the words people are actually saying, this is pretty clear. 
Trump thinks neo-Nazis and white nationalists should be condemned totally.

Trump also thinks that his neo-Nazi and white nationalist supporters aren't really neo-Nazis or white nationalists.

 

SaintsInDome2006

Footballguy
And that proves the point. It IS complex. And I believe fine people can be on the side of not removing every statue or reference or street sign. That's my only point. And that one is pretty simple. 
Ha, Joe, I loveya. Do you understand my point? To me Charlottesville is not about the statue debate. Neither is Trump's comment. The issue is simple as far as Trump is concerned.

The only way it touches on the statue debate is that people against tearing down CSA statues have got to realize that people like that are first and foremost against tearing them down. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
Bolded in @TobiasFunke's post 
Understood. 

I just quoted what Trump actually said about who he meant as "fine people":
 

"I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and white nationalists because they should be condemned totally.” 
Again. Maybe he didn't mean what he said. But that's what he said.

And I for sure don't see anyone I know claiming anything close to "So, there are the very fine people, chanting "Jews will not replace us"

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
Ha, Joe, I loveya. Do you understand my point? To me Charlottesville is not about the statue debate. Neither is Trump's comment. The issue is simple as far as Trump is concerned.

The only way it touches on the statue debate is that people against tearing down CSA statues have got to realize that people like that are first and foremost against tearing them down. 
For sure I see your point.

My only point was when Trump said there are fine people on the side of not wanting to remove every statue or street sign, I agree. 

I happen to think there are lots of things he says and means that he can be criticized for. Biden picking something he says he clearly didn't mean just seemed odd to me. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:

msommer

Footballguy
Understood. 

I just quoted what Trump actually said about who he meant as "fine people":
 

Again. Maybe he didn't mean what he said. But that's what he said.

And I for sure don't see anyone I know claiming anything close to "So, there are the very fine people, chanting "Jews will not replace us"
well, the people there that night chanted that. And some of them, there, were apparently "fine people" according to the president.

IMHO chanting "Jews will not replace us" disqualifies you from the distinction of "fine people". YMMV

 

TobiasFunke

Footballguy
And that proves the point. It IS complex. And I believe fine people can be on the side of not removing every statue or reference or street sign. That's my only point. And that one is pretty simple. 
But the people who were there weren't simply "people on the side of not removing every statue or reference or street sign." They were, at an absolute minimum, people who were willing to stand side by side with Nazis chanting "Jews will not replace us" in order to advocate for their position. Giving them cover by mischaracterizing them as innocent Confederate statue protectors is not OK.

Think about an issue you care about where you could potentially have common ground with white supremacist types. For me a good one is marijuana legalization. Would you show up for a joint marijuana legalization [or whatever your issue might be]/white nationalism rally to show your support?  Would you stick around when your fellow rallygoers- read a summary of them here- started chanting "Jews will not replace us?" 

Assuming not, what kind of person would stick around through that just to advocate for their chosen cause? Would you describe that person as a "very fine" person? And if you gave comments that were somehow misconstrued as endorsing all of the protestors instead of just some of them, what lengths would you go to to clarify those comments and make sure everyone in America knows how strongly you condemn and want to distance yourself from white nationalist types? Would you declare yourself a nationalist just one year later?

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
IMHO chanting "Jews will not replace us" disqualifies you from the distinction of "fine people". YMMV
I know the bolded feels like a fun zinger but I don't think many people's mileage varies there. 

I don't know anyone who would say they disagree with "Jews will not replace us" disqualifies you from the distinction of "fine people". Including Trump based on what he says. 

And I know people who are in favor or not removing statues and street signs who wouldn't say "Jews will not replace us" under any circumstance.

 

timschochet

Footballguy
I don't know anyone who would say they disagree with "Jews will not replace us" disqualifies you from the distinction of "fine people". 
Yes you do. You know at least one guy. You’re taking him at his word after the fact (why, I have no idea). But he’s guilty. 

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
But the people who were there weren't simply "people on the side of not removing every statue or reference or street sign." They were, at an absolute minimum, people who were willing to stand side by side with Nazis chanting "Jews will not replace us" in order to advocate for their position. Giving them cover by mischaracterizing them as innocent Confederate statue protectors is not OK.

Think about an issue you care about where you could potentially have common ground with white supremacist types. For me a good one is marijuana legalization. Would you show up for a joint marijuana legalization [or whatever your issue might be]/white nationalism rally to show your support?  Would you stick around when your fellow rallygoers- read a summary of them here- started chanting "Jews will not replace us?" 

Assuming not, what kind of person would stick around through that just to advocate for their chosen cause? Would you describe that person as a "very fine" person? And if you gave comments that were somehow misconstrued as endorsing all of the protestors instead of just some of them, what lengths would you go to to clarify those comments and make sure everyone in America knows how strongly you condemn and want to distance yourself from white nationalist types? Would you declare yourself a nationalist just one year later?
I think we'll just have to disagree. I don't agree with them, but I think there are fine people on the side of not wanting to remove every statue or street sign. 

Maybe it's a mistake, but I take Trump at his word when he says that's who was talking about. 

That's what it seemed like when he clarified it further denouncing them with "I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and white nationalists because they should be condemned totally.” 

It's as I said above. I think there are lots of things he says and means that he can be criticized for. Biden picking something he says he clearly didn't mean just seemed odd to me. 

 

[scooter]

Footballguy
And that proves the point. It IS complex. And I believe fine people can be on the side of not removing every statue or reference or street sign. That's my only point. And that one is pretty simple. 
But the people who were there weren't simply "people on the side of not removing every statue or reference or street sign." They were, at an absolute minimum, people who were willing to stand side by side with Nazis chanting "Jews will not replace us" in order to advocate for their position. Giving them cover by mischaracterizing them as innocent Confederate statue protectors is not OK.

Think about an issue you care about where you could potentially have common ground with white supremacist types. For me a good one is marijuana legalization. Would you show up for a joint marijuana legalization [or whatever your issue might be]/white nationalism rally to show your support?  Would you stick around when your fellow rallygoers- read a summary of them here- started chanting "Jews will not replace us?" 

Assuming not, what kind of person would stick around through that just to advocate for their chosen cause? Would you describe that person as a "very fine" person? And if you gave comments that were somehow misconstrued as endorsing all of the protestors instead of just some of them, what lengths would you go to to clarify those comments and make sure everyone in America knows how strongly you condemn and want to distance yourself from white nationalist types? Would you declare yourself a nationalist just one year later?
:goodposting:

Charlottesville was a "Unite The Right" rally.

I totally understand that there are many fine people who support Confederate statues.

But if Trump wanted to make that argument, he should have used a different occasion for it. It wasn't appropriate for him to use the phrase "many fine people" to describe a rally which was specifically designed for white nationalists.

 

timschochet

Footballguy
As far as Biden’s statement, it’s not weird at all, because neither he nor most people are willing, like Joe Bryant and Sinn Fein, to trust President Trump’s word on this matter. Polling after Charlottesville suggest that the vast majority of the public who are not Trump supporters were appalled by what Trump said and recognize it as a clearly bigoted statement, and did not believe him when he later tried to correct himself. 

Now perhaps Biden should have chosen a more recent example of Trump’s bigoted remarks: there are, after all, so many to choose from. But it wasn’t strange of him to choose that one. 

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top