"SEND HER BACK!" Will they defend this?

[Trebuchet]

Oops. That's a claim. We might be nearing the end of the cycle.

There'll be sooper-seekrit proof, just like there was that it was Obama who is the thin-skinned narcissist.

I can't wait for Trump's next rally. "Lock her up" is well nigh inevitable. And he'll stand there and gloat then say the next day he didn't approve of it.

 

[JoeMorgue]

And how was he racist? By being uncivil.

It doesn't matter if someone sits there thinking racist thoughts in their heads but doing nothing. What matters is actions. And the action in question was just incivility. The alleged motive is racism, but why would the motive even matter if the action itself weren't a problem?

Oh what dishonest crap.

NOTHING is racist via this logic. "Trump's not racist, he didn't fill out the official 'I am doing this for reasons of racism' form when telling 4 non-white women to go back where they came from so it's technically incivility."

 

[Belz...]

And how was he racist? By being uncivil.

- "You murdered him!"
- "And how did I murder him? By punching him. You're condeming me to life in prison for punching a man!"

 

[phiwum]

And how was he racist? By being uncivil.

It doesn't matter if someone sits there thinking racist thoughts in their heads but doing nothing. What matters is actions. And the action in question was just incivility. The alleged motive is racism, but why would the motive even matter if the action itself weren't a problem?



These are not separate categories, they are overlapping ones, obviously. Lynching is racism, but it's also violence, not incivility. Saying the n-word is racism and uncivil. Other forms of incivility may not be racist. For the purposes of this sub-discussion, it doesn't matter if Trump was also racist, it was still incivility. It wasn't violence, for example.

So complaints about what Trump said are still just complaints about incivility, whether or not the motive behind that incivility is racism, and whether or not your motive for complaining about that incivility is because of racism.

And because you'll likely misunderstand this if I don't make it explicit, note that I'm not even saying it's wrong to complain about incivility. I'm not even claiming that it's wrong to have a special interest in racist incivility in particular. But the claim was made, and not by me, that if you're arguing about incivility then you've conceded the "actual case", whatever that may be. I'm merely pointing out the implication of such a position. Feel free to not agree about incivility being irrelevant.

Let's cut to the chase. Do you think it's appropriate and reasonable for the President of the United States to suggest that four of his political opponents ought to go back where they "came from"?

If not, all your fanciful defenses are irrelevant. We all agree that what he's done is inappropriate and perhaps all that's left is to come to a conclusion of how grossly inappropriate it was.

If, on the other hand, you find his comments perfectly reasonable and appropriate, say so clearly and explicitly so that we can proceed in full understanding of your opinion.

 

[I Am The Scum]

It doesn't matter if someone sits there thinking racist thoughts in their heads but doing nothing.

It doesn't matter to you. If you don't care whether or not a racist is in the White House, then you are free to bow out of this thread and start one of your own. Of course, you'd have to state your case more clearly, so this is unlikely to occur.

 

[Upchurch]

Oh what dishonest crap.

NOTHING is racist via this logic. "Trump's not racist, he didn't fill out the official 'I am doing this for reasons of racism' form when telling 4 non-white women to go back where they came from so it's technically incivility."

This is the method behind the madness. Note that we are no longer talking about what an ass Trump is, but rather questioning whether racism actually even exists* in the first place. The topic is being shifted. The trolling is working.



* and if it does, it's the people who are calling Trump racist who are the actual racists

 

[JoeMorgue]

This is the method behind the madness. Note that we are no longer talking about what an ass Trump is, but rather questioning whether racism actually even exists* in the first place. The topic is being shifted. The trolling is working.



* and if it does, it's the people who are calling Trump racist who are the actual racists

"My side isn't wrong until you define to my impossible standards the exact kind of wrong they are" is not new to me. I recognize it for what it is.

 

[alfaniner]

Interesting prediction, here. I think it's likely true. We'll see.

Quote:Steve Silberman
This is what will happen: Trump's cultists will begin chanting "Send her back! Send her back!" at his next rally. He'll lean back and crack that goofy "I'm being naughty now!" grin and say "No, no - no, no - they say you're not supposed to say that anymore. It's not PC." [Cheers]

Yes, I think that's absolutely what will happen. Good prediction!

 

[phiwum]

"My side isn't wrong until you define to my standards the exact kind of technically speaking wrong they are" is not new to me. I recognize it for what it is.

Sure, we all understand you're a man of keen insight. You keep telling us.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Sure, we all understand you're a man of keen insight. You keep telling us.

Not quite sure that was warranted. You're not magically pulling real discussion out of anyone with anymore efficiency then I am.

Both of us are spinning our wheels talking "at" people who are impossible to talk "to" more often then not. The only alternative is leaving them to their soapboxes.

 

[Upchurch]

The only alternative is leaving them to their soapboxes.

Well, there are a few other options. One involves using a certain form tool and then continuing with the main topic of conversation more or less unimpeded.

Or, one could just ignore off-topic trolling efforts and continue with the main topic of conversation more or less unimpeded.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Well, there are a few other options. One involves using a certain form tool and then continuing with the main topic of conversation more or less unimpeded.

Or, one could just ignore off-topic trolling efforts and continue with the main topic of conversation more or less unimpeded.

Without the trolls there's no topic, because we're all in agreement, so there's nothing to talk about.

We can't ignore the trolls and continue the topic.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Without the trolls there's no topic, because we're all in agreement, so there's nothing to talk about.

We can't ignore the trolls and continue the topic.

disagree.

when we agree on the big issues, we can discuss the details and actually figure some stuff out.
When you have to fight of trolls, nothing really gets done - which is exactly what the trolls try to achieve.

 

[Upchurch]

disagree.

when we agree on the big issues, we can discuss the details and actually figure some stuff out.
When you have to fight of trolls, nothing really gets done - which is exactly what the trolls try to achieve.

This. With trolls, we argue about whether racism is real, without it, we might be discussing Trump's endgame with this or if it is merely distraction. Or maybe something else.

ETA: heck, we could even have actual dissenting opinions that isn't being burried in this BS.

 

[wasapi]

Here is the frustrating thing for me. Trump, again, is being evil, uncivil, outrageous. Another thing to add to the list of his 'most-vile'.

And, what will come of it? Nothing. It will just add to the list of disgusting comments. Next week, or today, he will open his mouth and his twitter again to another inappropriate comment. And then, another. But nothing will really change.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Trump supporting Diamond and Silk®
‏
Tweeted this support for the presidents 'words'

Nancy Pelosi said the WORDS that the President used were racist. But those same words are in the Dictionary. Does that mean that the Dictionary is now racist? Should all Dictionaries be banned since Democrats are offended by words? #TDS

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Trump supporting Diamond and Silk®
‏
Tweeted this support for the presidents 'words'

that must be fake

 

[Andy_Ross]

You would think so but they met the Pres in the Oval Office and he says good things about them.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Trump said

Minnesota, a State which I will win in #2020 because they can’t stand her and her hatred of our Country, and they appreciate all that I have done for them[/quote]

Omar received 78 percent of the vote in her Minneapolis district last year.

Does he know how it works?

 

[Delphic Oracle]

no.
Being racist isn't just being uncivil.
But nice try for trying to frame it that way.

Yup, because the gambit there is "democrats are also being uncivil" to "everyone is doing it/both sides are the same" and so "this is normal."