Politics Liberals and economics

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Actually, it was a fair question.

Trump's message certainly has a big nationalism component to it.

That's why I can't stand the guy. I'm into individualism, not nationalism or authoritarianism.

Naw it is a stupid gotcha question. What he should have said was, I hope he votes for me too. But with the PC shit of today you are suppose to "disavow" those not on the approved list.
Nothing to do with nationalism, individualism, both of which are fine with me at this point. We do have common ground though, down with authoritarianism, but I don't think the questioner
had this motivating her question. She just wanted to ask the gotcha question to see if the ogre could get the PC answer out quickly enough to please her followers.
 
Naw it is a stupid gotcha question. What he should have said was, I hope he votes for me too. But with the PC shit of today you are suppose to "disavow" those not on the approved list.
Nothing to do with nationalism, individualism, both of which are fine with me at this point. We do have common ground though, down with authoritarianism, but I don't think the questioner
had this motivating her question. She just wanted to ask the gotcha question to see if the ogre could get the PC answer out quickly enough to please her followers.

He brings these kinds of questions upon himself due to his nationalistic statements. Those are ones that appeal to Nazis and KKK.

Specific examples: deporting all the illegals, ban on muslims entering the country.

Nazis and the KKK hate anyone not white.
 
From your own link, btw:

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...ays-he-knows-nothing-about-white-supremacists

"I don't know anything about David Duke. I don't know what you're even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacist. I don't know. I don't know, did he endorse me, or what's going on?" he said. That prompted a back-and-forth that went, in part:

Trump: I don't know what group you're talking about. You wouldn't want me to condemn a group that I know nothing about. ... If you would send me a list of the groups, I will do research on them and certainly I would disavow them if I thought there was something wrong.

Tapper: The Ku Klux Klan?

Trump: You may have groups in there that are totally fine and it would be very unfair. So give me a list of the groups and I'll let you know.

Tapper: I'm just talking about David Duke and the Ku Klux Klan here.

Trump: Honestly, I don't know David Duke.

Sure, in the interview he claimed not to know David Duke. He, apparently not knowing who he was, disavowed his approval on Friday (two days earlier). Then on Sunday he's not sure. Then he's sure again with his tweet. Then on Monday he claims he had a faulty earpiece.

http://www.today.com/news/donald-trump-kkk-non-answer-very-bad-earpiece-made-it-t76661

Edit: I guess my point is that he is not doing a very good job of disavowing KKK and other support from racists. Can he control who supports him? No, not really (of course if he didn't support policies or used rhetoric that appealed to them he might lose some of their support). But, his failure to disavow their support very forcefully is kind of revealing, isn't it.
 
Sure, in the interview he claimed not to know David Duke. He, apparently not knowing who he was, disavowed his approval on Friday (two days earlier). Then on Sunday he's not sure. Then he's sure again with his tweet. Then on Monday he claims he had a faulty earpiece.

http://www.today.com/news/donald-trump-kkk-non-answer-very-bad-earpiece-made-it-t76661

Read your own link. He absolutely asked for a list of groups Tapper was talking about and said he didn't know who David Duke is. Duke was prominent in the news in 1992, about 25 years ago. If he wasn't into politics or current events back then, he'd never have heard of him. If he did hear of him, 25 years of silence about the guy makes him forgettable.

And what exactly is your beef? Trump disavowed him. That's the bottom line.
 
Who doesn't know who David Duke is?

Besides Denny and Drumpf, I guess.
 
Specific examples: deporting all the illegals, ban on muslims entering the country.

Yes Denny, I know where we differ. However, right here is where Trump is gaining his support and rightly so.
Deporting illegals is the damn law, just because it has not been enforced is not a reason to not enforce the law. Change it or enforce it, not ignore it.

He did call for a temporary ban on Muslims. Nearly 70% of the people agree with him including me. "They" have declared war on us! And I do use the term "They" correctly,
since jihad is an Islamic term, call for by Islamic clerics or learned people of Islam. They are of Islam and that is the way it is, the people of Islam need to correct this, we can
not correct it nor ignore it. So Trump is correct in calling for the ban until we can figure out how to protect ourselves. It is the prudent course of action, perhaps not PC but wise course of action.
 
Like I said. He disavows on Friday when asked about it (apparently not knowing who he is). Then doesn't disavow when asked about it on Sunday in a nationally televised interview, repeating the name many times in his answer. Then quickly tweets he disavows when he realizes his political error. Then 24 hours later claims his earpiece was faulty and that is why he didn't disavow in the interview. He basically admits he knew who David Duke is. It sounds like bullshit to me. He heard the question. He repeated the name several times. He knew who he was. And after a bit of a media storm he comes up with an excuse for not publicly disavowing when asked on a nationally televised interview. It is damage control. And I think that it is revealing that he is trying to pander to racists. Whether he is actually racist or not (I don't know him so I can't say, but his rhetoric and policies paint a picture), he is trying to win the vote of racists.
 
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...racist-poll-yougov-economist-column/80944446/

Think Trump's troopers are racist? Don't be so smug: David Mastio

Goofy poll cited by 'New York Times' reveals 29% of African-Americans aren't sure Emancipation Proclamation was a good idea. 40% of Hispanics agree.

Everyone who already thought that Donald Trump and his growing crowd of unwashed supporters were a bunch of racists now has confirmation from The New York Times: Nearly 20% of Trump backers nationwide disapprove of President Abe Lincoln’s Civil War executive order freeing the slaves in treasonous southern states.

What a fine end to Black History Month 2016. Confederate values are still with us even though all the Confederates are long and thankfully gone.

But breaking down the results of a poll of 2,000 people’s views into little bits based on a few hundred answers is dangerous business. Those who are hunting for proof of Trumpian perfidy will find exactly what they are looking for, but if you take the time to look a little more broadly, the rest of America doesn’t have an awful lot to be smug about.

In the same Economist /YouGov poll:
  • 15% of American Hispanics agree with those racist Trump supporters: The Emancipation Proclamation was a bad idea. A quarter of Hispanics are not sure.
  • 32% of American blacks back President Franklin Roosevelt’s decision to round up Japanese-Americans and put them in camps during World War II. According to The New York Times analysis of the poll results, that is almost exactly the same percentage as among Trump voters.
  • More than 30% of those UNDER 30 are not sure that President Harry Truman’s 1948 executive order desegregating the U.S. military was a good idea. 15% are sure it wasn’t. (Incidentally, those who were around back then, the 65 and up crowd, are significantly more likely to applaud Truman’s desegregation order than kids today.)
  • 43% of likely Democratic primary voters, a very liberal slice of America, approve of President George W. Bush’s pro-torture executive order after 9/11.
So, are America’s Hispanics nearly as racist as Trump supporters? Do a third of African-Americans have it in for their Asian countrymen? Are kids raised in the 1980s and later more resistant to desegregation than Americans born when Jim Crow was a thing? Do liberals love waterboarding?

Uh, no.

Here’s something that might put things in perspective: If you dig deep into the confusing Economist/YouGov online poll, you find that only 71% of American blacks approve of the Emancipation Proclamation. Five percent definitely disapprove of Lincoln’s action and 24% just aren’t sure.

Maybe that 29% of African Americans is waiting to see how the whole experiment with a slavery-free America turns out. After all, it has only been a century and a half. Still early days.

Or maybe, just maybe, when you dig down into the tiny details of a poorly-designed online poll, the “facts” you find tell you exactly bupkus. That can be enough if you are trying to prove a partisan political point, less so if you are trying to understand Donald Trump's followers.
 
Like I said. He disavows on Friday when asked about it (apparently not knowing who he is). Then doesn't disavow when asked about it on Sunday in a nationally televised interview, repeating the name many times in his answer. Then quickly tweets he disavows when he realizes his political error. Then 24 hours later claims his earpiece was faulty and that is why he didn't disavow in the interview. He basically admits he knew who David Duke is. It sounds like bullshit to me. He heard the question. He repeated the name several times. He knew who he was. And after a bit of a media storm he comes up with an excuse for not publicly disavowing when asked on a nationally televised interview. It is damage control. And I think that it is revealing that he is trying to pander to racists. Whether he is actually racist or not (I don't know him so I can't say, but his rhetoric and policies paint a picture), he is trying to win the vote of racists.

Winning the vote of racists by disavowing them?

If you say so.
 
Winning the vote of racists by disavowing them?

If you say so.
Who do you think is a more attractive option to them? The other candidates who swiftly, consistently, and forcefully denounce the racist organizations or the one that says "I disavow, okay", then I'm not sure if I disavow or not I will have to look into it, Nevermind I disavow, I'm sorry I couldn't hear the question. It's like some sort of code for "hey racists I'm really with you, but I can't be very public about it okay or I won't win."
 
Who do you think is a more attractive option to them? The other candidates who swiftly, consistently, and forcefully denounce the racist organizations or the one that says "I disavow, okay", then I'm not sure if I disavow or not I will have to look into it, Nevermind I disavow, I'm sorry I couldn't hear the question. It's like some sort of code for "hey racists I'm really with you, but I can't be very public about it okay or I won't win."

Ha! You protest too much. I don't think you are going to vote for Trump no matter what he said.
 
Who do you think is a more attractive option to them? The other candidates who swiftly, consistently, and forcefully denounce the racist organizations or the one that says "I disavow, okay", then I'm not sure if I disavow or not I will have to look into it, Nevermind I disavow, I'm sorry I couldn't hear the question. It's like some sort of code for "hey racists I'm really with you, but I can't be very public about it okay or I won't win."

I don't have your mind reading and code breaking skills, apparently.

If the KKK liked socialism, they'd support Sanders.

So what?

In fact:

http://crooksandliars.com/2016/02/sanders-disavows-sexist-bernie-bros

Sanders Disavows Sexist 'Bernie Bros' Supporters: 'We Don't Want That Crap'
 
This bernie bros thing has lots of code in it.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/evanmcsan/the-bernie-bros#.moMGWDVY0

FAIRFIELD, Iowa — The internet is home to the best of the Bernie Sanders campaign — the grassroots, youth-powered, bottom-up energy of social media fueled Sanders’s challenge to Hillary Clinton.

But the social web has also shown off the worst of Sanders supporters. Writing in her endorsement of Clinton this week, progressive writer Joan Walsh complained of harassment from online supporters of Sanders that the Vermont senator’s campaign aides have been aware of for months. Walsh called them “the Berniebot keyboard warriors,” but they’re more commonly referred to as the Bernie Bros.

(MONTHS. It took that long for Sanders to disavow. Just wow).
 
Reagan, when David Duke endorsed him:

Those of us in public life can only resent the use of our names by those who seek political recognition for the repugnant doctrines of hate they espouse. The politics of racial hatred and religious bigotry practiced by the Klan and others have no place in this country, and are destructive of the values for which America has always stood.

Trump, when David Duke endorsed him:

I don't know anything about what you're even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. So I don't know. I don't know—did he endorse me, or what's going on? Because I know nothing about David Duke; I know nothing about white supremacists.

barfo
 
Reagan, when David Duke endorsed him:



Trump, when David Duke endorsed him:



barfo

I don't know anything about what you're even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. So I don't know. I don't know—did he endorse me, or what's going on? Because I know nothing about David Duke; I know nothing about white supremacists.
 
I don't know anything about what you're even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. So I don't know. I don't know—did he endorse me, or what's going on? Because I know nothing about David Duke; I know nothing about white supremacists.

That would be what's known as a lie.

barfo
 
Back in 2000, Trump knew who David Duke was:

Mr. Trump painted a fairly dark picture of the Reform Party in his statement, noting the role of Mr. Buchanan, along with the roles of David Duke, a former leader of the Ku Klux Klan, and Lenora Fulani, the former standard-bearer of the New Alliance Party and an advocate of Marxist-Leninist politics.

"The Reform Party now includes a Klansman, Mr. Duke, a neo-Nazi, Mr. Buchanan, and a communist, Ms. Fulani," he said in his statement. "This is not company I wish to keep."

The entire article is pretty interesting.

barfo
 
Back in 2000, Trump knew who David Duke was:



The entire article is pretty interesting.

barfo

You like the bit about "This is not the company I wish to keep" ?

That's still 16 years ago.

Knowing who David Duke was 16 years ago and remembering anything about him (he is really obscure) now is irrelevant.
 
Hey barfo,

Yes, and if she is quoted as saying today "gay marriage? what's that? i don't know anything about that" you'll have a point, I suppose.

barfo
 
You like the bit about "This is not the company I wish to keep" ?

That's still 16 years ago.

Knowing who David Duke was 16 years ago and remembering anything about him (he is really obscure) now is irrelevant.

Your excuse-making for Trump is impressive, perhaps you will join Mags as a full-on Trump fanboy soon.

So, you think it is plausible that in 2000, Trump listed Duke as a reason he, Trump, wasn't going to run for president, but had forgotten about him so thoroughly by 2016 that 'the Klansman David Duke' did not ring any bells?

You think it is plausible that Trump knows nothing of white supremacy?

David Duke is not 'really obscure'. Anyone who follows politics, like you or me or Trump, for instance, immediately recognizes the name.

barfo
 
That's still 16 years ago. Knowing who David Duke was 16 years ago and remembering anything about him (he is really obscure) now is irrelevant.

Duke is well-known, especially to his fellow minor 1980s media stars like Trump. Anyone of Trump's age who read the news in the 80s knew of Duke's fame and TV appearances on talk shows. I used to watch him, and have kept up on his IRS problems. Of course, dumbbells who didn't read the news wouldn't know about him, but Trump and you don't fall into that category.
 
Your excuse-making for Trump is impressive, perhaps you will join Mags as a full-on Trump fanboy soon.

So, you think it is plausible that in 2000, Trump listed Duke as a reason he, Trump, wasn't going to run for president, but had forgotten about him so thoroughly by 2016 that 'the Klansman David Duke' did not ring any bells?

You think it is plausible that Trump knows nothing of white supremacy?

David Duke is not 'really obscure'. Anyone who follows politics, like you or me or Trump, for instance, immediately recognizes the name.

barfo

I suppose he meets lots of people and hears about lots of people. Duke was in the news at the time due to the reform party being in the news. It's been 16 years since, and there's no reason to remember Duke if you don't care much about politics.

I don't think he was saying he knows nothing about white supremacy. He knows nothing about them endorsing or supporting his candidacy. That's lie #2 on your part, barfo.

I don't think Trump necessarily followed politics all along. That's lie #3. You want me to keep score? That's like 4 now.
 
Duke is well-known, especially to his fellow minor 1980s media stars like Trump. Anyone of Trump's age who read the news in the 80s knew of Duke's fame and TV appearances on talk shows. I used to watch him, and have kept up on his IRS problems. Of course, dumbbells who didn't read the news wouldn't know about him, but Trump and you don't fall into that category.

The last time I saw David Duke, he was on Free Speech TV, a very left wing outlet. Not a hit piece on him, they gave him a forum to talk.

Explain that.
 
Look at the post in this thread. This is why the reporter asked the dumb ass question abut Duke. Much fodder for the uber left to fondle.
 
And for the record, I cannot stand the KKK or white supremacists. I think they are evil and scum of the earth. Period.
 
Back
Top