Nancy Pelosi is too far Right for the Democrat base

[hollodero]

(09-21-2017, 12:00 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Not sure what you are trying to say here. Are you saying Pelosi shouldn't denounce illegal activity?

Well, of course I'm not saying that. She does denounce it, and the protesters don't see her as supportive. They keep protesting her and don't feel she's on their side.

(09-21-2017, 12:00 AM)bfine32 Wrote: And I'm pretty sure Trump has denounced White supremacists and their vote. 

Problem is, the white supremacists are not so sure about that. Which they openly say, they are quite happy with Trump and do feel he is supportive. They are not protesting him.
That's different.
Now why that is, why they feel emboldened, I just have my educated guess. I'd say because they recieved the denouncement message in quite the way the left feared it would be recieved: as forced and just part of a political game, intwined in whataboutisms, in the end supportive.

- Also, still, white supremacists and immigrants, not quite a good comparison. But whatever.

(09-21-2017, 12:00 AM)bfine32 Wrote: The point of my original post is that those that are considering illegal immigrants as a voting base for the left are every bit as ignorant that consider white supremacists a voting base for the right. Perhaps it hit a nerve with some. 

If you were to take a learned guess who would you say casts the most votes in the past National Election: The 8,000 members of the KKK or 12,000,000 immigrants not authorized to vote? 

As for the question, I lean towards the unauthorized immigrants. Your whole voting process seems a bit dubious to me, and not quite that secure.

I of course wouldn't call that a voter base. (New American citizens are a democratic voting base I guess.) On the other side, I wouldn't reduce white supremacy to 8.000 KKK members. Of course most Trump voters aren't supremacists. With Steve Bannon, I dare not say though. Same goes for a certain portion of Breitbart readers. There's quite a grey area, and declared KKK members are just an extreme (extremely dumb) part of a certain base that isn't quite as distanced to supremacist ideas as some might wish. Like I see, say, Bannon, who is way too intelligent for the tiki torch. When I see this special portion of the electorate and their voices, I see a voting base that isn't free of supremacist ideas and I don't feel ignorant in doing so.

Nah, I get why one might see that differently, but I disagree with the absoluteness of your "equally ignorant" statement. In the end, for me all these equivalencies have the feel of "defending Trump" to it, in this case for allegedly being too close to white supremacy. And that this defending goes along with wrongfully reducing the white supremacy base to 8.000 KKK idiots. Hate and destruction tend to spread when emboldened, and accidentally or not, the David Dukes feel emboldened. It matters and shall not be discussed away with unfitting equivalencies.

(Because I already said so much, I will add that I also feel that even though maybe small in numbers, I feel like Trump doesn't want to lose the supremacist vote, which gives it political weight. But that's just my impression, based on my experience with my politicians and their misunderstood denouncements).