2015-2016 Republican Primary Season - Trump Courts the Conservatives

[lighthousekeeper]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Trump's merely a reflection of the white nationalist sentiment in the GOP.

37% of all voters want muslims banned from entering the US???

*edit: had to lookup the source to see that it specifically says temporary ban. Big difference there

* edit 2: it's interesting that the poll calls it a "widely-condemned plan" while at the same time showing it has a 37% (dare I say widely-approved) approval rate.

[BillJasper]

Germany's taken in a million Syrian refugees and haven't had a single terrorist attack related to them.

For the "home of the brave", we sure are scared shitless most of the time.

[ISiddiqui]

Sometimes I'm really proud of my city. This is one of those times... this was found painted on a bridge support in Atlanta:

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Sometimes I'm really proud of my city. This is one of those times... this was found painted on a bridge support in Atlanta:

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Rubio on Trump/Obama

Exactly. I'm sure I'm projecting some because he's the only viable candidate I don't hate, but I believe that Rubio is as personally disgusted by Trump's statements as Senate colleagues like Paul Ryan and Lindsey Graham. But he's trying to win a nomination, and it's terrifying his team has made the calculation that he can't go on record condemning it, but needs to give a milquetoast response that doesn't personally offend likely voters who believe that. I do wonder what he'd say if he was the frontrunner and looked likely to win the Republican nomination already (although it probably still wouldn't be nearly as strong as I'd like.)

Fwiw, I personally believe certain statements go beyond buffoonery into outright depravity and deserve to be called out regardless what it means for one's political future, but there's a reason I never actually went into politics with a PoliSci degree. Maybe I'll actually throw my vote away and vote for Kasich if he's the only candidate willing to stand on that principle.

[Solecismic]

Sometimes, the reaction to bigotry is as bad as the bigotry itself. It's shameful that people would celebrate this kind of imagery.

It will be nice when Trump is out of this race - though I suspect the MSM will suffer an irreparable depression.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Want to know why Trump has steadily pulled in front of the primary field? He's the one guy who at least tries to get stuff right.

It's the candidates & party flacks who are knocking him that are out of touch.

A Bloomberg Politics/Purple Strategies PulsePoll released Wednesday found that the real estate mogul’s latest remarks are backed by 65 percent of likely GOP voters. When told both sides of the argument, support for Trump’s proposal remained relatively unchanged at 64 percent.

The online poll conducted Wednesday also found that about 37 percent of those surveyed would be more likely to vote for the businessman after his call to temporarily halt Muslims from entering the United States until elected leaders can “figure out what’s going on.”

Poll: Majority of Republicans support Trump's Muslim ban | TheHill

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Want to know why Trump has steadily pulled in front of the primary field? He's the one guy who at least tries to get stuff right.

Donald Trump's file | PolitiFact

Trump's statements by ruling

Click on the ruling to see all of Trump's statements for that ruling.

• True0(0)
• Mostly True5 (7%)(5)
• Half True13 (18%)(13)
• Mostly False10 (14%)(10)
• False29 (40%)(29)
• Pants on Fire16 (22%)(16)

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

Donald Trump's file | PolitiFact

Trump's statements by ruling

Click on the ruling to see all of Trump's statements for that ruling.

• True0(0)
• Mostly True5 (7%)(5)
• Half True13 (18%)(13)
• Mostly False10 (14%)(10)
• False29 (40%)(29)
• Pants on Fire16 (22%)(16)

PM, you gotta remember that Jon isn't speaking about literal correctness here. Nothing so quaint as that. Correctness in this context is all about what conservatives really really really want to believe is true.

[Dutch]

I personnally cant trust Trump any further than I can throw him. I'm still convinced he's pulling a "Charlie Sheen" act.

[PilotMan]

I still don't think he really wants it. He hasn't invested anything else other than time. He is all about the $$$$$. Most of his net worth is based on the recognition of his name and running for President as many times as he had has been nothing but positive for him in that regard. This time he's hit the mother lode of free pub. He's laughing all the way to the bank right now. The rest doesn't really matter.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Dutch

I personnally cant trust Trump any further than I can throw him. I'm still convinced he's pulling a "Charlie Sheen" act.

That still doesn't excuse the third of the GOP that supports him.

[Edward64]

It may have started out as a joke but I do believe he wants it. He can smell the nomination now.

Also, I think he has hurt his business brand and probably has/will lose alot of business because of his antics. I think he thinks its worth it and is all in.

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I think he thinks its worth it and is all in.

He's 71. He probably doesn't care at this point because the clock is ticking.

I think the VP picks will be important this time around, if both nominees are near 70.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

Donald Trump's file | PolitiFact

Trump's statements by ruling

Click on the ruling to see all of Trump's statements for that ruling.

• True0(0)
• Mostly True5 (7%)(5)
• Half True13 (18%)(13)
• Mostly False10 (14%)(10)
• False29 (40%)(29)
• Pants on Fire16 (22%)(16)

But that site seems to cherry pick as much as Trump from what little I read.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

PM, you gotta remember that Jon isn't speaking about literal correctness here. Nothing so quaint as that. Correctness in this context is all about what conservatives really really really want to believe is true.

I'm sorry, ya'll seemed to have sort of misinterpreted what I meant.

When I said "get stuff right" I mean like this latest kerfluffle. There's no numbering the common sense approach of putting an end to importing your enemy. Again, anybody who doesn't realize that Islam is the enemy of pretty much everyone else on the planet is either a fool or an idiot afaic ... and that's an position that's not exactly uncommon amongst likely GOP voters. It's why Trump's statement not only played well but polls well.

He said at least a mild version of what a very large portion of us have been saying for years, he just happens to be a guy running for President saying it.

Same thing happened with his early focus on immigration. I want every illegal given 30 days notice to leave of their own accord but after that, bounties should be issued & paid for every one that's turned in dead or alive. Same as with nuisance critters in some jurisdictions. Nothing new here from here, I've explained the same proposal numerous times before. All nice & legal. I have additional notions on what should be done with those who aid, abet or harbor them as well, again, it's time to put the law to work in a common sense fashion, put some teeth in the law, and then enforce it.

There is NO more heinous criminal than an illegal afaic, they threaten the very sanctity of a nation. A nation without control of its own borders is merely a suggestion, not an entity. Those here illegally are nothing short of an invading force and should be treated as such. Those who render aid or comfort to them should face the penalties for their actions in the face of wartime.

Now, the point to me repeating all that once again is actually this: If you think I'm alone on this subject, you really are nuts.

More Draconian than average? Yeah, I'll buy that. But alone in the general sentiment? C'mon, are you actually going to kid yourselves that much? Look at the polling data on the subject. And what's more, state by state polls (CBS from Nov IIRC) in the early primary states showed that the issue of immigration as the one that likely GOP voters insisted a candidate agree with them on. More than religion, more than economics, more than terrorism.

Given where MY plan believes we should be, imagine the powerful allure of Trump being -- however lightweight it may have been -- the strongest talker on the subject. Fuck your numbers folks, anyone with eyes & a brain can see the damage done by illegal immigration on both grand philosophical and minute detail levels.

When I say "Trump gets it right", I'm talking about what matters most of all: he speaks to things that are important, and he at least speaks to them in a way that makes sense to a hell of a lot of people. He comes up short by my measure, sure ... but at least he seems to be trying. After the last two Pres. cycles, that alone is SOMETHING.

[Solecismic]

I want every illegal given 30 days notice to leave of their own accord but after that, bounties should be issued & paid for every one that's turned in dead or alive.

Can you go troll in some other item, please. Seriously, with all your bluster, I know even you don't think this is remotely viable or desirable policy.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I'm sorry, ya'll seemed to have sort of misinterpreted what I meant.

I'm pretty sure I didn't, no.

When I said "get stuff right" I mean like this latest kerfluffle. There's no numbering the common sense approach of putting an end to importing your enemy. Again, anybody who doesn't realize that Islam is the enemy of pretty much everyone else on the planet is either a fool or an idiot afaic ... and that's an position that's not exactly uncommon amongst likely GOP voters. It's why Trump's statement not only played well but polls well.

See, the problem is that you're taking the extremists who distort Islam and use that distortion to recruit the gullible in order to further their personal power and reputation and holding that up as representative of the entire faith. The enemy of everybody else on the planet?

Christians spent the better part of two centuries persecuting and/or killing Jews and Muslims (and, even better, people who were merely "suspected" of being Jewish or Muslim) in Europe.

The Thirty Years' War saw "Christians" pillaging, raping, looting, and murdering one another, ostensibly in the name of the "One True Faith." The wars of religion were more about state power than actual religious dogma, but that made a handy veneer to dress those conflicts up in: Catholicism versus Protestantism. And it turned central Europe into a charnel house for a generation or two. That's a legacy of Christianity - hostile not just to those who weren't Christian, but who weren't the "right" flavor of Christian.

You can add up every death resulting from acts of terror by radical Muslims and I'm reasonably sure Christianity still wins the "body count" on that comparison.

And if you're not willing to recognize that fairly basic truth, you're not really qualified to make an "enemy of the rest of the world" assertion about an entire faith to which you don't subscribe.

He said at least a mild version of what a very large portion of us have been saying for years, he just happens to be a guy running for President saying it.

The fun part? Doesn't matter. Doesn't matter how many of you have been saying a thing. Until just 20 years ago, the majority of voters in this country were against interracial marriage: "miscegenation" was a thing that "a very large portion of us" were saying would destroy the country, and had been saying so, for generations. A viewpoint being popular doesn't make it right. At the risk of invoking Godwin's Law, the Nazi Party had around 40% support in Germany in the early-mid 1930s, but that doesn't mean their views were correct; merely popular.

Same thing happened with his early focus on immigration. I want every illegal given 30 days notice to leave of their own accord but after that, bounties should be issued & paid for every one that's turned in dead or alive.

Have you any idea the can of worms that would open? You really think 'dead or alive' bounties wouldn't result in dead fucking American citizens for the crime of having brown skin? "I thought he was illegal, I swear!"

There is NO more heinous criminal than an illegal afaic, they threaten the very sanctity of a nation. A nation without control of its own borders is merely a suggestion, not an entity.

And yet, virtually every major power throughout modern world history which has tried to enforce its borders has failed. The Han Chinese built a 2,000 mile wall. Didn't keep the Mongols out. The Romans built Hadrian's Wall, but eventually retreated before the Picts and the Scots. Never mind their inability to keep the Goths, Visigoths, et al from sacking Rome. The Maginot Line didn't do shit to keep the Germans out of France. You want border controls? Go back to the days of city-states and build walls around city borders. The smaller a wall has to be, the more effective it's going to be. A wall along the Rio Grande isn't going to keep people out; they'll just tunnel under it (which is allegedly how southern migrants have been evading border patrol for decades anyway).

Now, the point to me repeating all that once again is actually this: If you think I'm alone on this subject, you really are nuts.

You may not be alone. Doesn't make you correct.

[quote]When I say "Trump gets it right", I'm talking about what matters most of all: he speaks to things that are important, and he at least speaks to them in a way that makes sense to a hell of a lot of people. He comes up short by my measure, sure ... but at least he seems to be trying. After the last two Pres. cycles, that alone is SOMETHING./QUOTE]

I don't think he's trying. I think he's playing you, and those like you, for fools.

And, again, "makes sense to a hell of a lot of people" is not an effective metric for correctness. There are all sorts of things that "made sense to a hell of a lot of people" over the last 250 years that, uh, were really bad ideas.

[miked]

I would reckon there are a lot more "illegals" contributing to society in a positive manner than many of these rural rednecks living off the government and demanding the end of welfare and immigration control.

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Fuck your numbers folks, anyone with eyes & a brain can see the damage done by illegal immigration on both grand philosophical and minute detail levels.

How weak are we on a philosophical level that our ideas can't survive the influx of others with different views of the world?

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

That still doesn't excuse the third of the GOP that supports him.

It doesn't excuse you for calling 1/6th of all Americans nazi's either...

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Dutch

It doesn't excuse you for calling 1/6th of all Americans nazi's either...

Care to provide a citation for that?

Listen, I've been saying for years that the GOP leadership's willingness to tolerate their extreme fringe is dangerous and Trump is just the manifestation of that prediction. That doesn't mean all or even most of the GOP is racist, but it does mean that too many of it's leaders are unwilling to call out the radicals and conspiracy theorists. Even now the only Presidential candidate willing to say something strong against Trump is Graham, all the others are still worried about drawing the votes of the white nationalists.

[Dutch]

It's not just you. It's 37% of the GOP are "white nationalists" plus picture of Hitler and the nazi flag posted by others and the rescinding of Godwins law...and that's where I guess we are at.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Again, anybody who doesn't realize that Islam is the enemy of pretty much everyone else on the planet

America's biggest enemies are rural rednecks living off of dubious disability claims so that they're sucking the public trust dry while they rail against it, all the while contributing nothing of value to the nation as a whole.

anyone with eyes & a brain can see the damage done by illegal immigration on both grand philosophical and minute detail levels.

Illegal immigration props up both the Agriculture and Restaurant industries, just to name two, and is a large contributor to the relative health of the building industry.

The common-sensical solution, given that reality, is just to legalize them.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Dutch

It's not just you. It's 37% of the GOP are "white nationalists" plus picture of Hitler and the nazi flag posted by others and the rescinding of Godwins law...and that's where I guess we are at.

Did I miss posts? Did we do that here, yet?

[PilotMan]

I think it's crazy that we aren't allowed to talk about a rise of ultra nationalism, coupled with the fear-mongering and scapegoating that's going on in certain populations in the US without being called out for violating some made up internet law.

History is history. We can only look at behavior patterns and the reactions to those behaviors, based on past events as evidence, to draw conclusions about what direction things are heading. Clearly, the awareness of that possibility, should be a deterrent and allow us to navigate the waters better, but some others seem hell bent on ignoring it altogether and repeating history.

[JPhillips]

To be clear I'm not talking about Nazis. I'm looking at parties like Le Pen's in France and Wilders' in the Netherlands. Parliamentary systems tend to breed extremist parties on the edges while our two party system has traditionally moderated the extremes. I see the rise of Trump as a reflection of the growing white nationalist sentiment in the GOP.

[Butter]

Trump still isn't going to win unless the rest of the GOP is stupid enough to let there be 8 challengers in all of the primaries. Eventually that support will consolidate behind someone else... but the question is whether or not Trump thinks he has enough backing now to pull a Perot. If he does that, it's over.

[spleen1015]

This is why I just stay away from politics.

People want to label Trump as Hitler and that's flat out wrong. He doesn't want to commit genocide. He just wants to protect our country by preventing Muslims from coming into the country. That doesn't make him Hitler and it doesn't make him a racist.

It is easy to discredit him by calling him Hitler or a racist. Whenever anyone gets labeled a racist people respond, so that's everyone's go to action in a situation like this.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I see the rise of Trump as a reflection of the growing white nationalist sentiment in the GOP.

I'll give you the nationalist part to some extent but racially/ethnically? If we were invaded by Canadians, Russians, Swedes the way our porous borders have been assailed by a considerable number of Hispanics OR if we were being attacked on a regular basis by adherents to the Church Of England then I dare say you'd see a pretty similar degree of animosity.

Behaviors & actions have contributed far more to the current level of contempt than anything else.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

This is why I just stay away from politics.

People want to label Trump as Hitler and that's flat out wrong. He doesn't want to commit genocide. He just wants to protect our country by preventing Muslims from coming into the country. That doesn't make him Hitler and it doesn't make him a racist.

It is easy to discredit him by calling him Hitler or a racist. Whenever anyone gets labeled a racist people respond, so that's everyone's go to action in a situation like this.

I have no problem calling him a racist as his statements on Muslims and immigrants and blacks clearly put him in that category. He's stated a clear intention to hunt down, arrest and ship eleven million people out of the county. He's a dangerous demagogue.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I'll give you the nationalist part to some extent but racially/ethnically? If we were invaded by Canadians, Russians, Swedes the way our porous borders have been assailed by a considerable number of Hispanics OR if we were being attacked on a regular basis by adherents to the Church Of England then I dare say you'd see a pretty similar degree of animosity.

Behaviors & actions have contributed far more to the current level of contempt than anything else.

I'd argue the Make America Great Again slogan is all about returning to a structure where whites make up a greater share of the powerful.

[lighthousekeeper]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

I know even you don't think this is remotely viable or desirable policy.

not with that attitude its not

[lighthousekeeper]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I have no problem calling him a racist as his statements on Muslims and immigrants and blacks clearly put him in that category. He's stated a clear intention to hunt down, arrest and ship eleven million people out of the county. He's a dangerous demagogue.

people break the law and he's simply calling for an enforcement of existing laws. why is that so radical?

[BillJasper]

White supremacist groups credit surging interest to Donald Trump: 'He's certainly creating a movement'

I wonder if they see the irony in "European-Americans"?

[molson]

I still don't think he's serious about any of this, not that that makes his comments any less deplorable.

Lindsey Graham had a really good take on all this that was being passed around with approval by even my Republican-hating liberal friends on facebook. The "race-baiting, xenophobic religious bigot" and "tell Trump to go to hell" lines has gotten the most play, but he also talked about how Trump really doesn't know what he's talking about, has no real knowledge of any of these issues, is in no way qualified to talk about any of this stuff, and that he's still just trying to shock people for attention.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Can you go troll in some other item, please. Seriously, with all your bluster, I know even you don't think this is remotely viable or desirable policy.

Viable ? Nah. Because we have far too many useful idiots these days.

Desirable? You're kidding, right? The old suggestion about repatriating illegals via airdrop sans parachute might be more cost efficient in the long run. But I'm completely steadfast that it should be an executable offense, it's the ultimate violation of sovereignty.

Now, that addressed, you can take your trolling accusation and shove it up your sanctimonious ass, you pompous prick.

I wasn't randomly lobbying for policy or retyping something I've mentioned numerous times before for random giggles, I was using the convenient example of one of my own positions as an example of how Trump doesn't have to get things exactly right to have an enormous appeal, he just has to point in the right direction. TWO-THIRDS of likely primary voters support what he proposed. If you think at least 1/3 to half of those would have a real problem with extending the plan to my version then you're even more out of touch with reality than it usually appears (which, lately, is a pretty high bar)

It's not trolling when it's a very ON POINT illustration of how the GOP leadership is completely out of touch with their own voters.

You can hate me, ignore me, oppose my point of view, whatever the hell tickles your pathetic little fancy. But the point stands, it's incredibly valid to the subject(s) at hand and you look like an even bigger fool than usual to try to deny that.

[molson]

What do you think about a war hawk with actual military credentials (Graham - who I'm sure would love to invade Syria on the ground and kill every terrorist and terrorist supporter) saying that Trump is helping ISIS and making the U.S. military situation much more difficult and dangerous?

Edit: Even Graham is a big proponent of the idea that you need support of Muslims (both those in the U.S. military, including specialists who understand the area and speak the languages, and allies in the middle east) to fight this war effectively.

[molson]

Here's the reality show-twist I was waiting for. He's not going to get the Mexicans, or the Muslims, so Trump is now shooting for 100% of the black vote. (Trump's lawyer then conceded that 100% was unrealistic, but they think they can get 93%)

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/donal...072716854.html

I can't wait until Trump goes all out embracing what he sees as "black culture". That could be an SNL skit, or something he actually does, I can't tell anymore.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

There's no numbering the common sense approach of putting an end to importing your enemy. Again, anybody who doesn't realize that Islam is the enemy of pretty much everyone else on the planet is either a fool or an idiot afaic ... and that's an position that's not exactly uncommon amongst likely GOP voters.

10 years ago it was homosexuals
50 years ago it was black people
70 years ago it was Japs
et cetera
et cetera

The majority of "conservative" (and I'd actually use the term reactionary) voters were wrong then, just like you're wrong now, and they ended up losing the battles then, just like you'll lose this one too.

Originally Posted by SackAttack

Christians spent the better part of two centuries persecuting and/or killing Jews and Muslims (and, even better, people who were merely "suspected" of being Jewish or Muslim) in Europe.

The Thirty Years' War saw "Christians" pillaging, raping, looting, and murdering one another, ostensibly in the name of the "One True Faith." The wars of religion were more about state power than actual religious dogma, but that made a handy veneer to dress those conflicts up in: Catholicism versus Protestantism. And it turned central Europe into a charnel house for a generation or two. That's a legacy of Christianity - hostile not just to those who weren't Christian, but who weren't the "right" flavor of Christian.

You can add up every death resulting from acts of terror by radical Muslims and I'm reasonably sure Christianity still wins the "body count" on that comparison.

And if you're not willing to recognize that fairly basic truth, you're not really qualified to make an "enemy of the rest of the world" assertion about an entire faith to which you don't subscribe.

This is a terrible argument. I'm not a Christian, but I'm a proud American and there are terrible, terrible things in America's history. But anyone trying to tar me with the actions or beliefs of those who lived before I was born, let alone hundreds of years ago, can go screw themselves. The fact that Islam was more progressive in many ways than Christianity in the Middle Ages is an interesting footnote, but what matters is today and this generation. The fact that a country like Saudi Arabia still doesn't allow women to drive cars or leave the house without a male chaperone is an abomination. The fact that they only started allowing women to vote this year is obscene, and I can say that even though "my country" didn't allow women to vote for well over half its history.

Originally Posted by JPhillips

To be clear I'm not talking about Nazis. I'm looking at parties like Le Pen's in France and Wilders' in the Netherlands. Parliamentary systems tend to breed extremist parties on the edges while our two party system has traditionally moderated the extremes. I see the rise of Trump as a reflection of the growing white nationalist sentiment in the GOP.

I don't think there's actually a rise in that sentiment. I think that people get called out (rightly or wrongly) for racism a whole lot quicker than they did before. I think that illegal immigration, "terrorism", or the excesses of the Black Lives Matter movement provide a convenient cover for people to state opinions that are racially/nationalistically motivated, but I actually think the number of racist xenophobes is declining all the time.

I'd compare it to crime statistics. Murder's steadily going down, general crime is, teen pregnancy/drug use are steadily going down, etc, yet if you ask people if they "feel" safer they say no.

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Can you go troll in some other item, please. Seriously, with all your bluster, I know even you don't think this is remotely viable or desirable policy.

You know I love you and he doesn't need my defending, but I don't understand why you keep trying to push people out of this thread. I despise some of Jon's views, but as long as he never actually puts his extreme beliefs into action I love having him post in these threads. I think a lot of the political debate problems today are because people post and interact in echo chambers, and hate him or love him Jon represents a sizable slice of the electorate that I would have very little insight in to otherwise. I don't think any amount of discussion will ever change his mind, but it helps me sharpen my rhetoric and pick my arguments for when I talk to more impressionable people who say some things in the same veins.

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

You know I love you and he doesn't need my defending, but I don't understand why you keep trying to push people out of this thread. I despise some of Jon's views, but as long as he never actually puts his extreme beliefs into action I love having him post in these threads. I think a lot of the political debate problems today are because people post and interact in echo chambers, and hate him or love him Jon represents a sizable slice of the electorate that I would have very little insight in to otherwise. I don't think any amount of discussion will ever change his mind, but it helps me sharpen my rhetoric and pick my arguments for when I talk to more impressionable people who say some things in the same veins.

Because you may think it's sharpening your rhetoric, but it isn't. It's too easy.

He says 1/3 of Republicans would be fine turning America into one long, sad episode of Dog the Bounty Hunter. That's an absurd interpretation of the polls - and even of Trump's comments. It's trolling, plain and simple. He doesn't believe any of this for a second - he's not that stupid.

Now we're on this idiotic path of whether Trump is baby Hitler. Which may be fun for the extreme left, but is about as appealing a real debate topic as what brand of diapers baby Hitler would use.

So I do this to try and get this item away from being every other political discussion out there. Which is crap like Jon's trolling on one side and "you're for white supremacism if you don't agree with the left" on the other side. It may make you feel rhetorically happy, but it's not real debate.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Which is crap like Jon's trolling on one side and "you're for white supremacism if you don't agree with the left" on the other side. It may make you feel rhetorically happy, but it's not real debate.

You mean like this?

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Now we're on this idiotic path of whether Trump is baby Hitler. Which may be fun for the extreme left

[lighthousekeeper]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Now we're on this idiotic path of whether Trump is baby Hitler.

^
must not be a fan of political cartoons, which have been using absurdity like this for 100s of years to make people think about a particular issue/event/person.

[JPhillips]

I reject the idea that at this time and place the excesses of Trump and the white nationalist right is mirrored by equally radical excesses on the left. Comforting yourself with a safety blanket of, "both sides do it" also isn't real debate.

[Solecismic]

I'm a fan of political cartoons that can make a point without resorting to the easy out. There are plenty out there who can make fun of Trump and add to the debate rather than shut it down with absurdity.

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I reject the idea that at this time and place the excesses of Trump and the white nationalist right is mirrored by equally radical excesses on the left. Comforting yourself with a safety blanket of, "both sides do it" also isn't real debate.

It's not comforting at all. All it does is hide the issues if you believe that supporters of Trump are all about racism. It's not a debate if you cry racism every time someone disagrees with you.

[JPhillips]

If the shoe fits, though...

Let's look at Le Pen's National Front and you tell me how it differs significantly from Trump.

In its 2001 program, the party linked the breakdown of law and order to immigration, deeming immigration a "mortal threat to civil peace in France."

Advocating the "return of any foreigner illegally entered to France towards his/her country of origin", she claims that she "refuses to give up the fight against illegal immigration".

a reform of the nationality regulations so as to remove dual citizenship and the automatic acquisition of French nationality

is fighting the Islamisation of French society

Since becoming leader of the party in 2011, Marine Le Pen has focused mostly on the perceived threat against the secular value system of the French Republic. She has criticised Muslims, for what she sees as their intents to impose their own values on the country.[171] Following the Arab Spring rebellions in several countries, she has been active in campaigning on halting the migration to Europe of Tunisian and Libyan immigrants

Basically everyone agrees that the National Front is a white, nationalist party. How is Trump different?

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

10 years ago it was homosexuals
50 years ago it was black people
70 years ago it was Japs
et cetera
et cetera

It has been a rough couple of centuries for the under represented white, Christian male. Why won't someone think of the trials they have had to endure?

[Solecismic]

You could start a new item about Le Pen and the history of her father's movement. There are undoubtedly similarities in some of their positions. And there are differences as well. It's too easy to take something we really don't like (the Le Pens) and just say, "hey, Trump is another Hitler or Le Pen or whatever's rising in Germany right now." That's called the strawman argument. At that point, you're not debating what Trump wants anymore.

[JPhillips]

But my whole point is that Trump is like the white, nationalist parties of Europe. Wouldn't comparisons to white, nationalist, European parties be appropriate for that comparison?

And I'm not sure why you're continuing to bring up Hitler when I specifically rejected the comparison to Nazis.