ALL HAIL PRESIDENT TRUMP

"

Turtledove wrote:

I have concluded that Trump is a racist for many other reasons and think he probably felt a kinship with his fellow racists and he wanted to let them know as explicitly as he could that he is with them. I believe that the more "common" interpretation of Trump's words regarding "fine people on both sides" is reasonable, less convoluted, more likely, and not a hoax.

This is pure raw confirmation bias. "I have previously concluded Trump is a racist, therefore when Trump says 'white nationalists should be condemned totally' what he means is that they're fine people." You're deliberately ignoring evidence that contradicts your position because it contradicts your position, and then you have the nerve to say that is reasonable and not a hoax. Buddy, you're hoaxing yourself.

Seriously, if you guys spent one quarter of the time you spend on this forum actually DOING anything about what you profess to feel so strongly about you might feel better about yourselves.

You are going back and forth on a GAME forum (which most of you don't even play) wasting your time (I know, it is your time to waste). But anyone that likes Trump reads what you say and puts it down to TDS, and the ones that agree with you nod their heads wisely in agreement. You are not changing anything. Not even minds.

Your obsession, HRC, recently has been doing a lot of tweets about activism, community service, etc. Why don't you listen to her?

Go out and run for office maybe (AOC got elected so any idiot can). Don't like that? Go down to the border and look after some of the kids you profess to care about.

My wife's leftie Catholic friend did and she felt like she had accomplished something. I think we can all respect that even if we disagree with the politics. She took the time to do what she felt was right and she did make a difference.

Go out and volunteer at a soup kitchen. You don't need money for that or even a lot of time.

Organize a toy drive or school supply drive for poor children.

Me and the wife go to out to old folks homes sometimes to visit and chat with them and we bring games (used to bring a cat but he died of old age and the ones we have now are too crazy to behave like normal people in public).

None of this is going to change the world but at least you can DO something and not waste your time.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

I have concluded that Trump is a racist for many other reasons and think he probably felt a kinship with his fellow racists and he wanted to let them know as explicitly as he could that he is with them. I believe that the more "common" interpretation of Trump's words regarding "fine people on both sides" is reasonable, less convoluted, more likely, and not a hoax.

This is pure raw confirmation bias. "I have previously concluded Trump is a racist, therefore when Trump says 'white nationalists should be condemned totally' what he means is that they're fine people." You're deliberately ignoring evidence that contradicts your position because it contradicts your position, and then you have the nerve to say that is reasonable and not a hoax. Buddy, you're hoaxing yourself.

I stated that your explanation was reasonable as well.

It may be confirmation bias but I have not ignored evidence that contradicts my position. The best evidence that Trump is not a racist is the word of a pathological liar. The list of evidence that Trump is a racist is very long and I'm not inclined to list out all of the examples or to Google search it. You won't believe it anyway because you suffer from confirmation bias more than I am in this case.

"

Turtledove wrote:

It may be confirmation bias but I have not ignored evidence that contradicts my position. The best evidence that Trump is not a racist is the word of a pathological liar. The list of evidence that Trump is a racist is very long and I'm not inclined to list out all of the examples or to Google search it. You won't believe it anyway because you suffer from confirmation bias more than I am in this case.

You moved the goalposts again. The best evidence that Trump didn't publicly call white nationalists fine people IS Trump's own words. The standard isn't mindreading: "oh, he said he condemns white nationalists totally, but I don't believe him." It's whether he said he condemns them or not, regardless of whether he means it or not, and whether he was talking about statue removal protestors or white nationalists when he said "fine people." The corporatist media has systematically lied to you and to many others about what he said.

Trump never publicly called white nationalists fine people. That isn't a matter of opinion, where two mutually exclusive beliefs can both be considered reasonable. That is a fact, and what you're pushing is a lie.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

You moved the goalposts again. The best evidence that Trump didn't publicly call white nationalists fine people IS Trump's own words. The standard isn't mindreading: "oh, he said he condemns white nationalists totally, but I don't believe him." It's whether he said he condemns them or not, regardless of whether he means it or not, and whether he was talking about statue removal protestors or white nationalists when he said "fine people." The corporatist media has systematically lied to you and to many others about what he said.

Trump never publicly called white nationalists fine people. That isn't a matter of opinion, where two mutually exclusive beliefs can both be considered reasonable. That is a fact, and what you're pushing is a lie.

I haven't moved the goalposts. My focus is more on the question, "Is Trump a racist?" I agree with you for maybe the third or fourth time that putting on blinders and focusing solely on that one incident that both explanations are plausible and reasonable. However, I believe that taking into account all the evidence including many other incidents that Trump is a racist.

I stated that Trump was trying to show support to his fellow racists as best he could while still maintaining plausible deniability that he was not praising racism. Or, perhaps a slight twist on that he was conflating racism with hate and saying that there were people on both sides that don't have hate in their heart.

I look at it this way. He is extremely intelligent and skilled at saying what he wants and getting his message across, amazingly good at it. It is probably his most powerful skill. If he really abhorred racism and wanted to condemn it why the hell would he bother even saying that crap about good people being on both sides!!!! He wouldn't have. He would have just flat out condemned it. He didn't simply condemn it because he was not comfortable doing that for some reason. Your theory seems to be that he didn't want to offend people there marching with the racists that weren't racist. I don't buy it.

"

Turtledove wrote:

Your theory seems to be that he didn't want to offend people there marching with the racists that weren't racist. I don't buy it.

I'm not talking theory, or whether you buy anything or not. Trump clearly was trying to show respect to "people there marching with the racists that weren't racist." That's explicitly who he was talking about. You can say you don't believe him, but it's crazy to act as if he said something different.

Trump never said white nationalists are fine people. Period. Fact, not opinion. The corporatist media is hoaxing you and millions of others. Period. Fact, not opinion.

------

On the topic of getting hoaxed, I recently discovered I was myself hoaxed by an out-of-context video clip of Virginia governor Northam. In that video, the abortion-related context in which Northam said "the infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother" was specifically the context of an attempted abortion that lethally injures, but does not immediately kill, the unborn child. It was fake news to frame the clip out of context so as to give the impression Northam was advocating "post-birth abortions," aka infanticide, in general, and for several weeks I fell for it. Rightwing and alternative media can hoax too; you can't trust anyone, and both sides do this.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

Your theory seems to be that he didn't want to offend people there marching with the racists that weren't racist. I don't buy it.

I'm not talking theory, or whether you buy anything or not. Trump clearly was trying to show respect to "people there marching with the racists that weren't racist." That's explicitly who he was talking about. You can say you don't believe him, but it's crazy to act as if he said something different.

Trump never said white nationalists are fine people. Period. Fact, not opinion. The corporatist media is hoaxing you and millions of others. Period. Fact, not opinion.

------

On the topic of getting hoaxed, I recently discovered I was myself hoaxed by an out-of-context video clip of Virginia governor Northam. In that video, the abortion-related context in which Northam said "the infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother" was specifically the context of an attempted abortion that lethally injures, but does not immediately kill, the unborn child. It was fake news to frame the clip out of context so as to give the impression Northam was advocating "post-birth abortions," aka infanticide, in general, and for several weeks I fell for it. Rightwing and alternative media can hoax too; you can't trust anyone, and both sides do this.

Okay, I agree that Trump never explicitly said that white nationalist are fine people in those public statements regarding this one incident.

However, I still think it is valid for people to reference Trump's statement regarding that incident as an example as to why they believe Trump is a racist.

"

Turtledove wrote:

Okay, I agree that Trump never explicitly said that white nationalist are fine people in those public statements regarding this one incident.

However, I still think it is valid for people to reference Trump's statement regarding that incident as an example as to why they believe Trump is a racist.

Trump used "You could be tougher and much more violent" on antifa. A few left-wing “antifa” counter protesters did engage in violence, they threw eggs and water bottles and fireworks at police officers but most of them didn't.

He used "You had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides," on Charlottesville when a white supremacist slammed his car into a crowd of counterprotesters.

You are not supposed to take his word literally and as such you can't trust what he say. He didn't use his usual get tough and violence on Neo-Nazi when they are demonstratively more dangerous. What is his intent? He is either an opportunist, bigot, Neo-Nazi sympathizer or racist. Pick one.

"

deathflower wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

Okay, I agree that Trump never explicitly said that white nationalist are fine people in those public statements regarding this one incident.

However, I still think it is valid for people to reference Trump's statement regarding that incident as an example as to why they believe Trump is a racist.

Trump used "You could be tougher and much more violent" on antifa. A few left-wing “antifa” counter protesters did engage in violence, they threw eggs and water bottles and fireworks at police officers but most of them didn't.

He used "You had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides," on Charlottesville when a white supremacist slammed his car into a crowd of counterprotesters.

You are not supposed to take his word literally and as such you can't trust what he say. He didn't use his usual get tough and violence on Neo-Nazi when they are demonstratively more dangerous. What is his intent? He is either an opportunist, bigot, Neo-Nazi sympathizer or racist. Pick one.

Pick at least one maybe more.

"

deathflower wrote:

Trump used "You could be tougher and much more violent" on antifa.

Yeah, in November of last year: https://dailycaller.com/2018/11/14/trump-antifa-opposition-mobilize/

"

deathflower wrote:

A few left-wing “antifa” counter protesters did engage in violence, they threw eggs and water bottles and fireworks at police officers but most of them didn't.

This is a reference to the Unite the Right 2018 rally in Washington DC (not Charlottesville). And I wouldn't use the phrase "threw fireworks" — they shot lit fireworks at police and journalists alike. Now if you ask me shooting fireworks at people is at least assault with a deadly weapon, because people can die from, say, an M-80 explosion to the skull. Not to mention previous events where Antifa have beat up, suckerpunched, and pepper-sprayed nonviolent people, or even tried to smash their skulls in with a sap made from a bike lock in a sock. Or destroyed automobiles, or set buildings on fire.

[Removed by Support]