Why does he refuse to condemn them?

[Dill]

(10-12-2020, 01:43 PM)PhilHos Wrote: I'll be honest, I didn't read any of this.

Look, it should be clear that when Trump told the crowd they had good genes, he was literally just telling them they were a good looking crowd. Now, YOU may think Trump is very intellectual and such a deep thinker, that he's capable of making a comment that to the average person is him just telling a crowd they look good but in actuality he's subtly saying "white people are better" but I don't like to give Trump more credit than he deserves. 

Well, I appreciate your honesty, but dismissing a counter argument without reading it is not only bad form. It signals intent to hold a position right or wrong, without considering the validity of arguments against it. 

Why assume one has to be a "deep thinker" to believe that white people have superior genes--and then tell them so, either spontaneously or after deliberation? Quite the opposite in fact. Racism does not require deep thought. But it does require belief that one "race" has "good genes" and others not so good. In a politician it only requires the minimal foresight not to mention "race" while saying saying so.  

The issue here was whom Trump included in his reference to "people of Minnesota." No Trump defender has yet explained why that term should include African Minnesotans, after Trump spent an hour defining them as "others" who don't belong in the US, much less Minnesota. 

Trump defenders argue as if Trump framing the audience as of good (white) genes requires some special extra mental act over and above his ordinary views of people. No reason to suppose that, if the assumption of white superiority is his "normal."