MAGA

[GMDino]

(07-17-2019, 05:36 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: True, it's often hard to admit you're wrong, especially when you've really dug your heels in on an issue.  Amusingly enough, I am accused of engaging in said activity when I've very publicly acknowledged being wrong on more than one occasion.  Some of us appear to have a border line pathological need to deflect.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-17-2019, 05:39 PM)GMDino Wrote:

It's a known fact.  I suppose you could file this along with ignoring the evidence of your racist comments in the "things GMDino pretends don't exist file".  I did enjoy your rapid backpedal when Bel called you out though, quite the display.

[Dill]

(07-17-2019, 01:55 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Read your hero's commentary in the OP of the The Carlson thread and tell me that is not degrading a race

This??

Carson is living proof that white, male americans cannot accept any kind of criticism and EXPECT everyone who comes to the US to bow down and accept that this is the greatest country God ever created and to keep their mouths shut and be HAPPY they were allowed to even come here.

Dino criticizes a segment of voters, tagged as a demographic. One can accept that various demographics respond differently to political stimuli without assuming that response is racially determined.

No that is not "degrading a race" any more than it is "degrading men."  Would have been more precise if he said "some" or "many" white male Americans, I'll give you that.  But calling that racism is just desperate hope.

And what a thing to be "calling out" right after the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES accuses Omar of "hating American" and tells the Squad to "go back home." Given that, you have time for spurious gripes about reverse racism?

[Dill]

(07-17-2019, 12:34 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Yeah, I'm with SSF on this. Reverse racism isn't a thing. It's just plain old racism.

This morning I watched a CNN interview with 8 Dallas residents who insist that Trump's "go back to where you came from" comment was not at all racist. Not in the slightest. But calling it "racist" WAS racist, said one. Then the House defined that same comment AS racist and voted to rebuke Trump for making it.

So I'm not sure what "plain old racism" could be anymore, though it appears we are not short of people who can "see" it and "call it out."

Two quick questions then:

Do appreciable numbers of white people in the US believe that they are victimized as a race/for their race? ("appreciable"=enough to turn elections at some level of government.)

If there is such a thing a racism, do you see it as largely a personal thing in the US, occurring occasionally between individuals, or is it largely a social relation occurring between differently empowered groups? Seems to me people who dispute the existence of "reverse racism" used to fall into the latter category. Now I'm wondering if that is changing.

[Dill]

(07-17-2019, 06:12 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: It's a known fact.  I suppose you could file this along with ignoring the evidence of your racist comments in the "things GMDino pretends don't exist file".  I did enjoy your rapid backpedal when Bel called you out though, quite the display.

"Ignoring evidence" is a bad thing then?  

Is there file for "SSF pretends counter arguments don't exist"?

[Dill]

(07-17-2019, 02:00 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Sure you don't, so then why is it that all Trump Supporters are racists? And you almost always pop blanket statements out there and belittle people a lot?

Just like your little gif about the "don't forget about the white people". That post immediately insults the poster(s) it was directed at and shuts down open communication and starts the personal attacks, however you believe you didn't start it, but you do quite often.

Its really why I don't respond to many of your posts, you're just baiting people so you can call them racists and put them down for no reason other than they are "Trump" supporters or supporters of something you are against.

Oh surprise hiding your racism as a parody/gif again.

O-Mike, Has Dino or anyone else in the forum ever claimed all Trump supporters were racist? I suppose that could have happened somewhere (I only check about a third of the threads), but I am unaware of it.

There is a race issue around Trumpism, though, for sure. By that I mean that week after week entire news cycles are dominated by debate and discussion over whether Trump's comments and behavior are racist. A such discussion then entails further questions for and about Trump supporters--do they agree with Trump? If they don't, do think his comments/behavior racist?  If they do, why would they continue to support him? What line would he finally have to cross before they finally said "enough"?  Trump supporters say they are not racist, yet his last campaign rally rang to chants of "send her back!"

Trump supporters then are understandably defensive as people ask them where they stand on racial issues. Some--not just Trump supporters--feel smoke is the best defense; so they reverse the racism charge at every opportunity. Suddenly any mention of "race" or politically framed image of a white or black person is "racist" in their view. Or what used to be racism--like telling brown Americans to "go back where they came from," is no longer racist because color is not mentioned. Either everyone is racist or no one is.   Here is an example of Trump supporters feeling THEY are being attacked when Trump is attacked for racist tweets. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/07/17/cnn_focus_group_of_republican_women_voters_trump_right_that_aoc_and_friends_hate_america.html  "Because when you say, you know, don't you think he's racist? You're accusing us. You're accusing him." Says one Republican woman to the CNN reporter asking questions. And they think Trump's tweets are "reverse personal attacks." He was attacked first. And it's the Squad who are racist. Why haven't they befriended any white people?

But it is important to remember that the news media are not in control of Trump's Twitter account or his public addresses. Whether praising our adversaries or hurling very personal insults at women, minorities and immigrants, HE says what he says, NOT anyone else. So no one criticizes Trump supporters "just because" they support Trump. They criticize Trump supporters because supporting Trump means accepting his behavior--either by agreeing with it directly or as price paid for court picks and tax cuts. 

I would address the issue you raised about "personal attacks" too. Some acknowledge no difference between traditional critique of political positions/policies and personal attack. Trump's blanket description of the mainstream press as "Fake news" is one example of this. Another would be his insistence that certain brown women who criticize the US government for not living up to ideals stated in the Declaration of Independence "hate" America, followed by giving them the choice to love it or leave it. Framed in this fashion, ANY critique is "personal attack." The only way you can avoid personal attack is not by criticizing Trump or Trump supporters at all. 


A final point: in your above criticism of Dino you hold up certain standards: don't engage in personal attacks, don't shut down open communication, and don't "bait" people so you can put them down.

These seem like worthy standards, but do you set them aside when you support Trump? Does he bear no responsibility for "shutting down communication" on this message board and elsewhere? For "baiting" people?  If you say people personally attack Trump supporters just for supporting Trump, it seems you are either not acknowledging his behavior, or assuming it is not really all that bad. If you do acknowledge his behavior, and that it is as bad as I and others think, then you should understand why people might be moved to criticize him and turn questions on his supporters.

[Belsnickel]

(07-18-2019, 03:42 AM)Dill Wrote: Two quick questions then:

Do appreciable numbers of white people in the US believe that they are victimized as a race/for their race? ("appreciable"=enough to turn elections at some level of government.)

I don't think the number in this category is appreciable. I do, however, think appreciable numbers of white people feel like they have been abandoned by one party in favor of helping minority groups instead of addressing concerns they see as important.

(07-18-2019, 03:42 AM)Dill Wrote: If there is such a thing a racism, do you see it as largely a personal thing in the US, occurring occasionally between individuals, or is it largely a social relation occurring between differently empowered groups? Seems to me people who dispute the existence of "reverse racism" used to fall into the latter category. Now I'm wondering if that is changing.

I know what you're saying, but you have to keep in mind that for me, racism is racism. "Reverse racism" is a term used by people who just try to categorize racism from a minority group towards the majority differently than the other way round. However, it's still racism and claiming it as "reverse racism" isn't helpful.

Racism exists both on an individual level and on a systemic one. Systemic racism is less likely to be expressed in the "reverse racism" form than individual just by its nature. The people in power will be looking out for their own. Individual racism happens in all different directions, though.

[jj22]

(07-18-2019, 03:42 AM)Dill Wrote: This morning I watched a CNN interview with 8 Dallas residents who insist that Trump's "go back to where you came from" comment was not at all racist. Not in the slightest. But calling it "racist" WAS racist, said one.  Then the House defined that same comment AS racist and voted to rebuke Trump for making it.  

So I'm not sure what "plain old racism" could be anymore, though it appears we are not short of people who can "see" it and "call it out."

Two quick questions then:

Do appreciable numbers of white people in the US believe that they are victimized as a race/for their race? ("appreciable"=enough to turn elections at some level of government.)

If there is such a thing a racism, do you see it as largely a personal thing in the US, occurring occasionally between individuals, or is it largely a social relation occurring between differently empowered groups? Seems to me people who dispute the existence of "reverse racism" used to fall into the latter category. Now I'm wondering if that is changing.

CNN "misled" it's viewers about these women. They weren't regular everyday people. They work for Trump. Same group that came to his grab them by the ***** defense.

https://dfw.cbslocal.com/2016/10/10/local-women-express-unwavering-support-for-trump/

[Dill]

(07-18-2019, 09:14 AM)jj22 Wrote: CNN "misled" it's viewers about these women. They weren't regular everyday people. They work for Trump. Same group that came to his grab them by the ***** defense.

https://dfw.cbslocal.com/2016/10/10/local-women-express-unwavering-support-for-trump/

Duly noted, JJ.

LOL “The Bible absolutely condemns hypocrisy.”

Hillary would be "Obama on steroids."

[GMDino]

Anyone remember WAY back when Trump said he would never swear again?

He apparently forgot.

https://news.grabien.com/story-trump-if-we-didnt-have-all-bullsht-wed-be-much-further-along

Quote:TRUMP: "And the reason we have to, not only to do new things, which we will, and you know statutorily, and we had all sorts of artificial witch hunts over our head. Can you imagine if we didn’t have to go through that hoax, I don’t know that we would’ve done any better. To be honest with you, I think we’ve done more in two and a half years than any president ever. First two and a half years.


[Applause]


TRUMP: “But could you imagine what it could have been if we didn’t have the witch hunt — you said it. I won’t say it, because it’s a terrible word. So I will not say that this guy said if we didn’t have the bull****  —”


[Applause]



TRUMP: “No, no, could you imagine if we didn’t have the time wasted, the time and everything. Can you imagine — and you know, a friend of mine said maybe you wouldn’t have done as well. Is that possible? That can happen. Maybe we would have had too much time on our hands. Who knows. But I can say, nobody in their first two and half years has done anywhere close to what we — not me — what we’ve all done."

https://tinyurl.com/y4zk3a6s

(Note I had to make a tinyurl because the address contained a banned word)

During his speech President Trump told the crowd he ran into a businessman recently who does not like him.

Quote:President Trump: I don’t like him. Never liked him… I saw him and said, “How you doing?” And I said to him, “You know, you don’t like me and I don’t like you but you’re going to support me because you are a rich guy. And if you don’t support me you’re going to be so god**** poor you’re not going to believe it.”

[Dill]

(07-18-2019, 09:01 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I don't think the number in this category is appreciable. I do, however, think appreciable numbers of white people feel like they have been abandoned by one party in favor of helping minority groups instead of addressing concerns they see as important.

That would perhaps explain some polls on the subject. You've likely seen these and more.

According This NPR poll from Oct. 2017, 55% of whites believe that whites are discriminated against.
https://www.npr.org/2017/10/24/559604836/majority-of-white-americans-think-theyre-discriminated-against

The number is 75% of Republicans in this March 2019 poll from Hill-HarrisX. Only 38% of white voters in total thought there was none. https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/433270-poll-republicans-and-democrats-differ-strongly-on-whether-white.

Which brings us to this: Republican support for Trump rises after racially charged tweets: Reuters/Ipsos poll
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-poll/republican-support-for-trump-rises-after-racially-charged-tweets-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKCN1UB2UD.  That's a 5 % rise. His net approval among Democrats dropped by 2% lol.

I was listening to CNN last night. Apparently some Trump staffers were aghast at his recent tweets--until they brought positive results. The impression I have had since the election is that Trump has marshaled and continues to marshal the perception that whites get the short end of the stick now into mass support. Tweets about the economy or foreign policy don't seem to have such direct effect.

(07-18-2019, 09:01 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I know what you're saying, but you have to keep in mind that for me, racism is racism. "Reverse racism" is a term used by people who just try to categorize racism from a minority group towards the majority differently than the other way round. However, it's still racism and claiming it as "reverse racism" isn't helpful.

Racism exists both on an individual level and on a systemic one. Systemic racism is less likely to be expressed in the "reverse racism" form than individual just by its nature. The people in power will be looking out for their own. Individual racism happens in all different directions, though.

Just to keep the issue of "reverse racism" clearly in historical context, it emerged in the wake of the victory over segregation in the 1960s and the Bakke case in the early '70s as "reverse discrimination," a term referencing the perception of whites who felt they were now discriminated against for jobs and college placement. "Racism is racism" was then the premise of those who claimed reverse discrimination. There was a dean from a Texas law school who was famously anti-integration in the early 60s, but when affirmative action became law he shifted tactics, arguing that individual merit alone, not race or any other factor, should count in admissions--essentially re-purposing MLK's "content of character" argument in hopes of keeping down minority admissions. 

By the '90s, "reverse racism" had replaced "reverse discrimination" as a research term used by people polling or otherwise studying people's perception about race issues--usually by researchers who didn't believe there was such a thing, though there definitely were white Americans who believed that white Americans were now subject to racism.

The perception of white victimhood is still a thing for sure. https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/08/myth-of-reverse-racism/535689/ 
LOL Remember when Trump's DOJ diverted resources FROM Affirmative Action to go after colleges that discriminated against whites?https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/01/us/politics/trump-affirmative-action-universities.html?action=Click&contentCollection=BreakingNews&contentID=65650032&pgtype=article&_r=1

I'd say "systemic racism" would be impossible to express as "reverse racism," since it depends on one race controlling the system/government/laws and the other not.