Are all Trump supporters racists?

I think so. Many of them didn't want the kind of change that Trump represented, and still voted for Hillary or didn't vote at all, but I think most people are kind of sick of the status quo. This was a change election. The only reason the Democrats still had a decent chance of winning was that the Republicans ended up with the wackiest nominee in modern history.

Not really. Looking at the exit polling data seems to indicate that this was very much a "vote against the other side" election. Large numbers in both parties had reservations about their candidate, but hated the other one more.

Hillary was just too toxic and it motivated the Republican base. If Bernie had been the nom, the Rs wouldn't have had all the corruption stuff to smear him with.
 
Whoever said it was disqualifying? What disqualifies Hillary is that she didn't win 270 electoral votes. There were many factors going into that, although I suspect the main one was that most people wanted a change.

In context, Don was referring to the claim that they disqualified her so people should not have voted for her, and that Trump's supporters voted against her when Trump himself did very similar things.

If morals were consistently applied evenly, then people should have massively voted 3rd party or not voted at all.
 
I would if it was a real scandal. Using a private server that may have been less secure and may have led to inadvertently disclosing secrets is not a big deal to me.

Actually purposefully selling secrets? That I would care about.

And now the Don is making official calls on his own unsecured phone lines.

The functional theme of politics in the US right now seems to be naked hypocrisy.

BTW: Bannon isn't the only problematic link to no-nazisim and the really dark end of that part of the political spectrum.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/0...elationship-white-nationalist-movement/212502
 
Last edited:
Perhaps, but transparency doesn't seem to be a factor when it comes to Trump, who's financial and current dealings are opaque.

Keeping things in perspective is quite reasonable, so long as one isn't trying to give a free pass to one's preferred side, like more than a few people did and are doing very obviously.
 
I think most people are kind of sick of the status quo. This was a change election.
The grass is always greener on the other side of the hill, and many people are sick of living in the real world where problems are hard and solutions are messy. But will they find it any better on the other side?

Reality doesn't go away just because you are sick of it. I predict a lot of Trump supporters are going to be very disappointed in the next 4 years. Just like the Tea Party, and all the other idiots who think that knee-jerk reactions and simplistic solutions are the answer to all their problems.

The only reason the Democrats still had a decent chance of winning was that the Republicans ended up with the wackiest nominee in modern history.
If they had ended up with Bush then Hillary would have been a shoe-in.
 
Travis, I knew you would mention the Republican connection with NAFTA. I will just point out the all important final negotiations were completed by Democrats during the Bill Clinton Administration. As an example of the differences that were applied, simply look to the latest scam attempt called TPP. Democrats are all for it, yet Republicans are not. There's a reason for this.

Now, to look upon NAFTA favorably is foolish for the US citizen. Of course free trade is a good thing, however trade imbalance is not. Manipulating your Country's currency value is not. This is exactly why factories across the US, about 70,000 of them, have shut down and relocated outside the USA. NAFTA is the "Globalist" answer to redistribution of wealth. The idea is to take jobs and industry from one Country and give them to another that has been less fortunate. 70,000 factories. That's a lot of Americans out of work. So this has not been the best thing for the US. Let's combat poverty sure, but not at the cost of creating it here within the US as a result. NAFTA has been disastrous for the US and nothing short of a miracle for Mexico and China. However, enough is enough. NAFTA must go or be renegotiated completely. That's the only answer that will work.

Democrats were and are responsible for the final draft and approval of NAFTA.
If you're in the US, you have witnessed the results, unless you have been shielded in one of the West Coast states. Our industrial middle "rust belt" has been all but destroyed. To deny this is beyond ignorance. To deny that Democrats tend to group minorities within large cities likewise. To deny Democrats have purposely left an entire group of people out of the American dream is outrageous. I only hope these same people find relief during the Trump admin.


Chris B.

Americans do not have a right to all the jobs. Jobs belong to people. People who may or may not be in the USA. I don't care about America. I care about the whole world.

Eventually an equilibrium will be reached and low skill jobs will stop leaving America. In the meantime the best course of action for Americans is to try and improve their skills.
 
Most people?

Standard GOP tactic, polling less than 50% of the votes cast, indeed attracting fewer votes than your opponent somehow represents a rock-solid presidential mandate because the 45% of eligible voters who didn't bother to register and/or vote can be counted as tacitly supporting your candidate :rolleyes:

OTOH a president who polls comfortably more than 50% of the votes cast and overwhelmingly wins the electoral college does not have a mandate and must be blocked at every turn because.......melanin :rolleyes:
 
Who made that argument?

The Trump campaign and its fellow travelers when they said not to vote for Hillary because she didn't divorce Bill for playing hide-the-sausage with other women. Of course had she done so then she would instead have been castigated for divorcing him.

OTOH thrice-married Trump is a perfect advert for traditional Christian family values :rolleyes:
 
Americans do not have a right to all the jobs.

That's enough said, really, to grasp the credibility of your position. No Americans claimed that Americans have a right to all the jobs in the first place here, after all.

Jobs belong to people.

And your thoughts on the loss of jobs to non-people or automation actually reflect this?

People who may or may not be in the USA. I don't care about America. I care about the whole world.

Eventually an equilibrium will be reached and low skill jobs will stop leaving America. In the meantime the best course of action for Americans is to try and improve their skills.

While it's good that you're thinking of all humanity, one of a good government's primary roles is to be an administration who are directly seeking to improve the lot of their citizens. Pushing jobs out of the hands of their citizens is generally not a sign of the government act being a good one.
 
Last edited:
The grass is always greener on the other side of the hill, and many people are sick of living in the real world where problems are hard and solutions are messy. But will they find it any better on the other side?

Reality doesn't go away just because you are sick of it. I predict a lot of Trump supporters are going to be very disappointed in the next 4 years. Just like the Tea Party, and all the other idiots who think that knee-jerk reactions and simplistic solutions are the answer to all their problems.

Any movement is going to use simplistic catch phrases. What's truly idiotic is when the President of the US actually thinks simplistic solutions will work. We've had 8 years of that crap. Time for a change.

If they had ended up with Bush then Hillary would have been a shoe-in.

What's that? You sure she wouldn't have been a loch?
 
We don't generally use establishment of guilt by a jury as our evidentiary standard for political opinions here.

Who are "we" here?

Bill Clinton was never convicted of rape. Juanita Broaddrick's accusation was so non-credible that even Ken Starr rejected it.
 
We don't generally use establishment of guilt by a jury as our evidentiary standard for political opinions here.

What the hell is the point of a skeptics' forum, if our standard of truth is the same as the common woo-woo?

You're basically saying that the allegation is enough. Why? Does this apply to everybody? Or just liberals?
 
What the hell is the point of a skeptics' forum, if our standard of truth is the same as the common woo-woo?

You're basically saying that the allegation is enough. Why? Does this apply to everybody? Or just liberals?

Of course not. If it did, Trump would be guilty of raping a 13 year old girl.

It's, as you say, only applied to liberals.
 

Back
Top Bottom