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.
MAGA hats/clothing plus politically related apparel discussion thread (4 Viewers)
- Thread starter squistion
- Start date
- Status
Don't Noonan
Footballguy
Why do you think Democrats are dead set against the wall? Because Trump wants it - they hate him so much they refuse to let him win. So much, they are willing to shut down the government over it when the cost is nothing in the grand scheme of things.
NREC34
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
There's a $200,000.00 fine the business paid for keeping black employees off the floor when one of Trump's friends (Robert Libutti) came around.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
The first two sentences could arguably be correct, although I think it's more because they know it's politically unpopular.
The last sentence is total nonsense. The cost has nothing to do with it. They're not giving it to him for the same reason you don't give your screaming toddler a bowl of ice cream at 8 in the morning, or the same reason the cops don't give a hostage-taking bank robber a plane and a police escort to the airport, or for that matter the same reason the Dems refused to budge when Cruz and friends shut down the government in 2013: if you give in to unreasonable tactics you're just inviting more of them.
Hawkeye21
Footballguy
Maybe some think that way but I don't think all do. I don't want the wall because I think it's stupid, wasteful, ugly and harmful but I'm not a Democrat so I guess I can't speak for them.
jamny
Footballguy
And?
"Trump was not held personally liable for the violations of his hotel, and there is no indication that he was ever questioned by state officials as part of their investigation."
Henry Ford
Footballguy
jamny
Footballguy
This is a different story than the claim that Trump himself would hide black employees, made by one person I believe. That's what you brought up. Where are the people that confirm that story?
Henry Ford
Footballguy
No, his claim was that Trump would have the casino do it.
It appears he also had the casino do it for his buddy, which isn't really much of a different story.
jamny
Footballguy
Two different stories. One is a claim against Trump by a single individual. Correct me if more people came forward.
The other had nothing to do with Trump except that it was at a property owned by him.
Officer Pete Malloy
Footballguy
So who would ultimately be responsible for what happens in said property if not the owner?
Henry Ford
Footballguy
No, it was a friend of his whom he hung out with socially and the casino would keep black people away from him.
This guy.
Same guy.
Yes, to my knowledge Kip Brown is the only employee who has come forward from the 1980s regarding his story. However, the same property was sued for racial discrimination in the early 90s and settled (likely with non-disclosure agreement.) So that certainly doesn't shock me.
jamny
Footballguy
I'm sure this will get me in trouble with the resident lawyers but I would say that whoever managed the casino would be responsible but Trump Casino and obviously Trump himself, should be held liable.
Hawkeye21
Footballguy
This got me thinking some more. Isn't this very similar to how Trump goes about doing things? Isn't this why people like Trump? They want to own the Libs. Trump wants to reverse everything Obama did. It's all about winning against the other side.
The General
Footballguy
There’s obviously something to that. Trump was too inept to get it done when he could and now he’s too crappy at the politics part to get it done.
100% on the very stable genius.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
You could stop twisting his words around under the premise of semantics and let him speak for himself. Just a thought.
jamny
Footballguy
Sorry for the delayed reply. I thought this deserved more than the short comment that I would have given from the bus.
First off, as I said even at the time, the term ####hole was uncalled for. Even if it was never confirmed by anyone (I think) willing to go on record and denied by the Administration, I will accept that he said it. Lets go with a better term and call them impoverished for the sake of this conversation. As I said to begin with, Trump lacks empathy. I think most people will agree with that. He has also stated on numerous occasions that he wants the best and brightest to come to this country. Lets also say that he probably knows very little about other countries than what he sees on Fox News or out of his limo window.
If you were to name 2 or 3 of the most impoverished countries in the world, what would you think of.
If you were to name 2 or 3 of the most successful countries in the world, what would you think of?
Keep in mind that he had just met with the Prime Minister of Norway.
I honestly don't know if you can get more highly educated and skilled workers from Haiti than you could from Norway but if you just go by their economy, which is probably all Trump knows, it would seem to favor Norway. Is that a wrong thing to say? Is that racist?
Well if you said "this is fine" looking these losers with what they are doing and will continue to march on and just the group. The sensible or "very fine person" should have enough sense to see that no good would come from this and get the hell out. Not like there were physically forced to join them
I think that is a reasoned response.
But, I would just add, that we need the proverbial "ditch-diggers" too. For 100+ years we have been bringing immigrants to handle the jobs Americans don't want - whether that is building skyscrapers, or laying rail roads, or digging mines - we bring in immigrants who do the work - and the come here with the understanding that they put in the hard work, so that their future generations have their spot in America.
We can't afford to simply bring in a bunch of PhD caliber people - because they are not going to pick crops, or repair bridges, or help build out cities.
jamny
Footballguy
Exactly, that's what I said. How do you know those people that just came to protest the taking down of the statue, and could have been very fine people, didn't get the hell out of there when it started getting out of control?
jamny
Footballguy
No argument here. I think we should be loosening restrictions for people to come here and earn a green card. Not everyone can get a work or relative to sponsor them. Seems like it's a PITA for companies to do legally. I don't know enough about it though and what can be done.
I think one of the biggest challenges with immigration in general - it is all encompassing, and nobody wants to take the time to work out all the ramifications.
Immigration policy should be tied to border security. It should also be tied to economic development strategies - how many people do we really need to improve our own economic system. It should also be tied to our foreign and our trade policy - how can we efficiently invest in other countries so that people don't feel the need to overwhelm the US system? (THis is one of the most vexing issue I see with Trump - we should not be trying to wrangle every peso from Mexico - we should encouraging economic growth, so that people want to live and work in a booming Mexican economy - that would stop a lot of people from crossing the border. We should be helping Mexico grow - so they have the resources and incentive to tackle the illegal drug trade, etc.) None of our policies work in concert with the others.
At some point we need a coherent policy that takes a look at all of these issues strategically - and not rely on a knee-jerk piecemeal approach that we do today.
That could be part of it but quite a bit of it may be that he has exaggerated that the southern border is a national emergency, that he exaggerates how the wall is going to stop drugs from pouring in, that by building the wall it will cure our border problems. That he has to fabricate that the migrants are full of disease and are rapists, murderers and gang members. Maybe they feel that since they now control 1/3 of the legislative branch they need to get something more than just a 3 year extension for 700,000 of the dreamers when it was Trump that overturned those rights in the first place.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
Appreciate the response, but you kind of missed my point. You can substitute any word you want for ####hole. In fact let's just cross it out entirely. It's still incredibly racist to say (paraphrasing here) "why do we have to take people from Haiti and Africa? I want people for Norway!" Here's why:
- Countries don't emigrate, people do. Even if the average person from Norway is more [insert whatever adjective you think makes a desirable immigrant] than the average person from Haiti, that doesn't mean that every prospective immigrant from Norway is more [adjective] than every prospective immigrant from Haiti. And it's not a guess to assume Trump was talking about individual humans, not countries- that was the entire subject of the conversation. He straight up said it: "why do we have to take people from ...."
- So at a minimum, this is obvious a textbook example of bigotry based on national origin. I assume even the staunchest Trump supporters can acknowledge that, yes? It's the literal definition of discrimination based on national origin.
- Which by the way is a violation of federal law if done in the employment context, but that doesn't apply here of course. Still, I think that context is helpful here. Immigration, like employment, chooses people, not countries. It's one thing to recruit from some larger class or group in the immigration or employment context. It's quite another to say you want to outright reject individuals from some larger class or group, in either context.
- Now let's consider the amazing coincidence. The people favored by his bigotry (citizens of Norway) are almost exclusively white, and the people frowned upon by his bigotry (citizens of Haiti, El Salvador and Africa) are almost exclusively dark-skinned. Quite an amazing coincidence, no? I think most people would accept at this point that this is a pretty clear case of racism- even though he doesn't come right out and say it, the coincidence is too great to ignore.
- But we don't have to rely on that coincidence, because Trump was kind enough to go full racist in another way- he grouped the entire diverse continent of Africa together as a single class. What is the common thread that allowed him to dismiss every individual prospective immigrant from Africa regardless of national origin? Economics? Nope- Africa is on average poorer than other continents, but there are plenty of wealthy people there (side note- Equatorial Guinea has a higher GDP per capita than Mississippi!) and as I mentioned before people emigrate, not countries. Culture? Not possible- Africa is home to several large, sophisticated modern cities like Lagos, Cairo, Dar es Salaam, Casablanca, etc. as well as every other type of lifestyle you can imagine. Crime? Plenty of African countries with violent crime rates lower than ours. This will be the case with any other common thread you try to identify, because it's an entire freaking continent. So why exclude every African? I suspect you know what the common thread is, and so do I.
- tl;dr version: discrimination by national origin + discrimination against the entire continent of Africa = racism
Last edited by a moderator:
Max Power
Footballguy
You know, the best argument I've heard is that while maga people might be asking for it, that shouldn't be free reign for everyone to attack them. Which kind of seems to be the issue these days.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Max Power
Footballguy
Well the media should hold a higher standard. But that's not on the docket. They suck.
knowledge dropper
Footballguy
Honest Question
How do those that are anti-Trump react when they see a minority wearing a MAGA hat?
How do those that are anti-Trump react when they see a minority wearing a MAGA hat?
sho nuff
Footballguy
That was already asked. And most said the same as when a white guy is wearing it.
Hawkeye21
Footballguy
I'm confused and ask myself why. I try to understand it but usually try not not to spend much time worrying about it. Everyone has their reasons.
jamny
Footballguy
Respectfully, Tobias, I think that not only did you miss my point but you barely acknowledged it. I understand your view if you approach it from the opinion that Trump is racist but it would help if you keep an open mind if we're going to cover 999 more examples.
Here's a little thought experiment. I'm sure it'll get some snarky responses from others but let's give it a shot. Let's say the entire world's population was white but everything else is the same. Same economies, same living conditions, same everything. Do you think that Trump would welcome the white Haitians with open arms or would it be the same?
I'm not saying that Trump doesnt see color but in this topic, I think it is based more on economics than the color of skin.
Here's a little thought experiment. I'm sure it'll get some snarky responses from others but let's give it a shot. Let's say the entire world's population was white but everything else is the same. Same economies, same living conditions, same everything. Do you think that Trump would welcome the white Haitians with open arms or would it be the same?
I'm not saying that Trump doesnt see color but in this topic, I think it is based more on economics than the color of skin.
jamny
Footballguy
Stealthycat
Footballguy
I addressed each of them - that you don't like me pointing out the silliness of them is what you disagree with. When put in context none of what was said is racist.
"sucks" .... that sounds like some hate right there. I bet I'd have been called a racist to say Obama's "Change we can believe in" hats sucked.
Stealthycat
Footballguy
everyone's past can be dissected and things found ......... and painted to make people look a certain way
sure - yours and mine both and I've lived a pretty sparkle clean life and I could still be painted as this or that with the right twisting sure
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
I am very confident you couldn't find dozens of quotes and posts from my past that could be interpreted as racist. Sure, I did dumb ####- lying, stealing, etc in my youth, but that is not what we are talking about. (Although Trump does have dozens of accusations of that stuff too).
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
I do think he would welcome them with open arms. In fact I have very little doubt about that. His laserlike focus on the southern border as a source of terrorism threats and illegal narcotics while completely ignoring the northern border which is actually the more dangerous one for terrorist passage and the source of the most dangerous opioids entering the country from abroad is just one of countless examples of him making decisions based on the skin color of foreigners rather than objective facts.
But the question also implies a limited view of racism, and ignores my basic point. Even if he didn't, that would be discrimination based on national origin, obviously. Countries don't emigrate, people do. And there is no rational reason to discriminate against the entire continent of Africa- as I said even if you think it's poor or uneducated or whatever on average that's obviously not true everywhere, and I'd argue that believing it to be is very clearly racism given that the only commonality that covers basically the entire continent is darker skin color. So why group it together? It might be racism borne of absurd ignorance rather than malice, but that doesn't make it not racism.
As I quoted a couple days ago, "racism is not merely a simplistic hatred. It is, more often, broad sympathy toward some and broader skepticism toward others." Trump is clearly guilty of broad sympathy towards white people and broader skepticism towards non-whites, both in the "####hole countries" rant and in many, many other examples.
FWIW I do agree with your point about MAGA hats and Trump supporters, though. It's unfair to call them racist based on solely the hat or their support for Trump. I've been railing against that since before the election and will keep doing it. They are people who accept Trump's rampant bigotry and misogyny and don't think those things should disqualify someone from the presidency. That is damning enough, no need to imply something that isn't there.
jamny
Footballguy
Ok, fair enough. Unfortunately that is such an extreme position to me that it's pointless to continue. We will never agree.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
At work the fire wardens for each floor were given red caps with white lettering (way before MAGA) the say "fired warden" or "deputy wire warden". I have a deputy one. I would never wear it in public anyway (even before MAGA) but wear it outside to do yard work. It's funny but after MAGA in the back of my mind I wondered if people would thing I was wearing a MAGA cap - but still wore it anyway to do yard work. One day my step sons dad came down our stairs as I was blowing leaves wearing that hat and started laughing when he got close saying "I thought you were wearing a MAGA cap".
I still wear to do yard work sometimes.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
I guess. But I don't think "this is an extreme position" is an effective counterargument. Trump takes plenty of extreme if not outright fraudulent positions, and there's plenty of evidence that some of these extreme/fraudulent positions are fueled by bigotry (eg my example of focusing exclusively on the southern border as a means of stopping terrorism and narcotics when more terrorists and the most dangerous opioids pass through the northern border). He's an extreme person. You're basically saying "I just can't believe Donald Trump would break from the norms of our civilized society like that," which ... come on, dude.
sn0mm1s
Footballguy
squistion
Footballguy
Similar to my comments in the LGBT thread about "Gays for Trump":
knowledge dropper
Footballguy
- Status
Similar threads
