Are all Trump supporters racists?

[Stacko]

Hey, is that your graphic? Can I steal a copy?

EDIT: Oops, quoted wrong post. Should be:

Not my graphic but feel free to use it. Saw it on twitter with a link to the survey it was made from.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

I'm speaking of the Constitution. If you didn't get that, my mistake.* The christian god of course is not explicitly mentioned in the Declaration, just "Nature's god, Creator, and Divine Providence."


*Perhaps not.

Written by the same man. Certainly the US was not intended to be a Christian only nation. Yet it is a nation founded upon Christian ideals and beliefs. Freedom of religion is alive here, yet it seems to be under constant attack by those who choose to believe nothing. Yet simply look to your money to see who the US trusts in..........
Chris B.

 

[Resume]

So a cross changes the Constitution? It forces people to worship a certain way?

Nope, just endorses a particular religion.

I don't want one burning in my yard or anything, but I don't mind one as part of a Christmas display. My wife certainly doesn't view it as anything required or endorced by the US Government as a national religion, as only a nut case would.

What you or your wife view as an endorsement doesn't matter. It's what the courts decide. One man's nutcase is another man's visionary. Some would say only a nutcase would oppose reasonable gun control, or believe in a giant North American monkey.

That's like complaining about the American Eagle being used as an endorsement of Nazi Germany......... Chris B.

Except that it's nothing like it.

 

[Mumbles]

Not my graphic but feel free to use it. Saw it on twitter with a link to the survey it was made from.

Funny part - if you assume that "average American" means "white American", then the only alternative for anyone who has a glancing knowledge of US history is "white Americans have gotten more than they deserve."

 

[kookbreaker]

I just find it funny that Atheists don't volunteer to work thru Christmas, that's all. It seems that though they may disapprove of the holiday, they enjoy the benefits of it without complaint.....Chris B.

For the record, being an atheist does not mean you automatically disapprove of the holiday. So your are building yet another strawman. Do you ever do anything else?

Also, I have known plenty of atheists who work Christmas. I choose not to because there is no point having the store open on that day and there is family that does celebrate.

 

[Resume]

Written by the same man.

Who never mentions the christian god.

Certainly the US was not intended to be a Christian only nation.

No, it wasn't.

Yet it is a nation founded upon Christian ideals and beliefs.

No, it wasn't. Hardly any of it.

Freedom of religion is alive here . . .

Yep.

. . . yet it seems to be under constant attack

Which it isn't.

By those who choose to believe nothing.

Atheists believe in a lot of things

Yet simply look to your money to see who the US trusts in..........
Chris B.

Meaningless.

 

[turingtest]

Written by the same man. Certainly the US was not intended to be a Christian only nation. Yet it is a nation founded upon Christian ideals and beliefs. Freedom of religion is alive here, yet it seems to be under constant attack by those who choose to believe nothing. Yet simply look to your money to see who the US trusts in..........
Chris B.

The DOI and the Constitution were written by the same man? Do tell...

 

[Resume]

The DOI and the Constitution were written by the same man? Do tell...

Good point. Jefferson probably wrote the DOI but Madison penned the 1st Amendment.

 

[Stacko]

anyone who has a glancing knowledge of US history.

I think this is a large part of the problem. There's a strong desire in many to focus only positive American history and this causes significant problems and creates absurd, illogical views lie those shown in the survey. For example: Lawrence Colburn quietly passed away last week with no fanfare. If there was a better knowledge of the warts of American history, he would be a national hero.

 

[blutoski]

That's getting into a slippery area. One can agree that some parts need amending from time to time, but not to the point of deletion of certain rights......

Some of those rights were viewed to be bestowed upon us by God. Let's not limit those out of existence. Chris B.

My impression isn't that Strict Constructionists want to delete rights... they just want to restore the original definition of who is entitled to those rights.

ie: White Christian Males with Wealth.

They argue that the Constitution never said these rights are for everybody, so the amendments and 'interpretations' extending the scope of rights to others (Blacks, Atheists, Women, the poor) are not legitimate.

 

[blutoski]

I think this is a large part of the problem. There's a strong desire in many to focus only positive American history and this causes significant problems and creates absurd, illogical views lie those shown in the survey. For example: Lawrence Colburn quietly passed away last week with no fanfare. If there was a better knowledge of the warts of American history, he would be a national hero.

I call it the Little House On The Prairie problem.

When I was a kid, I read the series of mostly autobiographical books authored by Laura Ingalls Wilder. These were adapted into a TV series that ran in the 1970s.

In the books, it explains how their family had exhausted the food supply in their original hunter/scavenger subsistence, squatting in the public woods of Wisconsin. Basically, tragedy of the commons. As luck would have it, the government had massacred enough tribes in the Dakota region to offer free land to settlers, so they headed West. This was essentially the first book, about their starvation and government handout rescue. (Little House in the Big Woods). The pilot episode of the TV series does mention this.

Once they moved to their first plot of free land in Walnut Grove, they had two years of failed crops in Walnut Grove Minnesota, received government relief funds each time, but abandoned that stake. They accepted another series of free plots around Minnesota and Kansas, failed each time, accepted a bailout, moved. Today we'd call that serial bankruptcies. Finally found success in Burr Oak, Iowa and did a pretty good job of farming there, with the occasional natural disaster that qualified them for government assistance. Specifically, grasshopper relief funds and free education for their kids, which was state level assistance. They moved again to Mansfield Missouri, where they had a 200 acre farm that was very successful. I believe this farm has been preserved as a national monument or something.

Anyway, the point is that Laura was constantly describing how the government helped them, but the TV series mentions none of this. Further, the TV series had to retconn how they got the farm. In a later season, they invent a story where the government 'made a mistake' and now they owe the government money for the farm unexpectedly, so Pa gets a second job in a lumbermill to pay for the government's screwup.

Nowhere does it mention their segregationist stance and Pa's participation in pogroms against Catholics who tried to settle in some of the communities where they lived.

My concern isn't really about a TV show... my concern is that this may be typical of how Americans learn about their past in general - through a jingoistic filter.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Written by the same man. Certainly the US was not intended to be a Christian only nation. Yet it is a nation founded upon Christian ideals and beliefs. Freedom of religion is alive here, yet it seems to be under constant attack by those who choose to believe nothing. Yet simply look to your money to see who the US trusts in..........
Chris B.

Exactly christian not papist. That is why christmas is an unamerican holiday. You need to keep the real christians separate from that papist stuff.

 

[shuttlt]

Look what happens when black is substituted for average American.

[IMGw=640]http://i1070.photobucket.com/albums/u492/rfstack/000_1.jpg[/IMGw]

This seems to be a larger problem than Trump voters. White America disproportionately doesn't view African Americans as average Americans. Trump is a symptom of a much larger problem.

I thought the point was that African Americans had unique problems and were uniquely mistreated and hence needed effort to be expended to advance their interests that average Americans don't need. Is that not the case? Given all the rhetoric about the disproportionate suffering of the black community, if after 8 years Obama hasn't managed to asymetrically direct any resources to them, I'm baffled as to why he still seems to be popular in the black community. Why would one expect people to think that they were getting more or less than they deserve in the same numbers as average Americans if they have unequal problems and have unequal resources dedicated to them?

In any case, it seems that Hispanics also tend to think that African Americans did not get less than they deserve. The same is true for the "other" racial demographic. I graphed the percentages and the black viewpoint is clearly the outlier, not the white one which is broadly similar to hispanics and "others".

There is then broad agreement in the data that average Americans are suffering regardless of race.

Honestly, as an outsider, I find the logic of the Huffington post article baffling and offputting. It's as if they were writing exclusively for people who already agree with them, so they leave out the argument. They seem to be claiming that the graphs demonstrate the white people in general, and Trump supporters in particular do not think black people are deserving. If that was the question they wanted to ask, then they should have paid YouGov to poll that question (and maybe clarified what they mean by "deserving"). The question they in fact asked and the answers they got look to me to be consistent with a disagreement between Republicans and Democrats on how genuinely afflicted the black population is, and/or a disagreement on the nature of fairness (equality of opportunity, equality of outcome.... its pretty clear from the links in the article that HuffPo go heavily with equality of outcome), and/or a disagreement about whether the assistance the black population is justified given the assessment of their situation, and the definition of fairness being used. They just come across as hyperbolic, partisan liars to me.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

The DOI and the Constitution were written by the same man? Do tell...

Obviously, there was also input by others on the Constitution, but yes Jefferson pops up as the lead effort. I'm sure there were other copies penned by other individuals as well. My statement was inclusive of Thomas Jefferson and not meant to be taken as excluding the other founding fathers.

Perhaps to cover all bases I should have simply said the founding documents were prepared by a Brotherhood of Masons. Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

My impression isn't that Strict Constructionists want to delete rights... they just want to restore the original definition of who is entitled to those rights.

ie: White Christian Males with Wealth.

They argue that the Constitution never said these rights are for everybody, so the amendments and 'interpretations' extending the scope of rights to others (Blacks, Atheists, Women, the poor) are not legitimate.

Wow, that would be a very racist and sexist view......I don't know anyone like that. Perhaps those attending cross burnings in sheets may think that way?

Or possibly those that practice Sharia law? Certainly doesn't sound like a Baptist view.....Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

For the record, being an atheist does not mean you automatically disapprove of the holiday. So your are building yet another strawman. Do you ever do anything else?

Also, I have known plenty of atheists who work Christmas. I choose not to because there is no point having the store open on that day and there is family that does celebrate.

Completely agree, there are Atheists who view Christmas with a chuckle as they should. You're right. I've got to remember to not type anything that could be viewed as an all inclusive statement. That's what gets Trump into trouble.
Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

I think this is a large part of the problem. There's a strong desire in many to focus only positive American history and this causes significant problems and creates absurd, illogical views lie those shown in the survey. For example: Lawrence Colburn quietly passed away last week with no fanfare. If there was a better knowledge of the warts of American history, he would be a national hero.

Almost every Country is where it is because they killed off all the natives that were living there before.......Sure, we killed lots of American Indians, they killed lots of us too. We killed lots of Mexicans and they likewise killed lots of Americans. But they lost and to the victors go the spoils. God Bless America!
Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Nope, just endorses a particular religion.


What you or your wife view as an endorsement doesn't matter. It's what the courts decide. One man's nutcase is another man's visionary. Some would say only a nutcase would oppose reasonable gun control, or believe in a giant North American monkey.


Except that it's nothing like it.

Certainly it is endorsing Nazism to have an Eagle on display. I think I'll sue, I feel damaged by looking at all those Nazi Eagle endorsements on our buildings etc.
Chris B.

 

[blutoski]

Wow, that would be a very racist and sexist view......I don't know anyone like that. Perhaps those attending cross burnings in sheets may think that way?

No 'perhaps' about it.

But it extends beyond the Klan, obviously. Just this Summer, the 4th Circuit overturned North Carolina's voter laws for "...Intentionally targeting a particular race's access to the franchise." You don't have to wear sheets to believe thems coons gettin too uppity with they votin an all.

Or possibly those that practice Sharia law?

Sure, all versions of Sharia, most of which in the USA is Christian. I often refer to the conservative Christian right as the American Taliban.

Certainly doesn't sound like a Baptist view.....Chris B.

Not sure how 'Baptists' got into the conversation.

 

[Resume]

Certainly doesn't sound like a Baptist view.....Chris B.

Here's a Baptist view on integration:

“The facilities should be separate. When God has drawn a line of distinction, we should not attempt to cross that line,” he said in one sermon. In another: “The true Negro does not want integration. He realizes his potential is far better among his own race.”

Failing to heed the call from Southern Baptist leaders to integrate their churches in pursuit of racial justice, two-thirds of evangelicals polled expressed no interest in seeing their congregations become more ethnically diverse . . .