Question for Trump supporters

BobTheCoward said:
But if it is something that is attributable to how one acts, it isn't ultimately tied to race.
Click to expand...
No because it's ultimately tied to the idea that most of that race doesn't have and share those actions.

Consider this....

A female friend of yours is talking with her other female friends...

"Oh yeah, I'm friends with Bob. I know he's a male, but it's okay because he's one of the good ones."

If you over heard this, what would be your belief as to this group of women's opinions about men in general?
 
PhantomWolf said:
No because it's ultimately tied to the idea that most of that race doesn't have and share those actions.

Consider this....

A female friend of yours is talking with her other female friends...

"Oh yeah, I'm friends with Bob. I know he's a male, but it's okay because he's one of the good ones."

If you over heard this, what would be your belief as to this group of women's opinions about men in general?
Click to expand...

That it's reasonably accurate.
 
theprestige said:
No.

I asked for some sign of good faith. You took that as an opportunity to to be mean. That was a choice you made. Own it.
Click to expand...
No, you asked for something other than prurient interest, and I assure you there's no prurience here.

If it's good faith you want, specifically "a thread where we debate policy proposals (such as they are) sincerely and in good faith," between the two of us I'm the one who's mentioned specific policy proposals. You've just complained about my tone and insulted me.

You're welcome to take your ball and go home if you want. I will continue to maintain, with full sincerity and good faith, that Trump's policy proposals (such as they are) are so poorly conceived and frankly unfinished that I cannot imagine anyone rationally supporting them without having some ulterior reason to do so. If you think that's being mean, you should have read the adjectives I used before dialing back to "poorly conceived and frankly unfinished."
 
Last edited:
PhantomWolf said:
No because it's ultimately tied to the idea that most of that race doesn't have and share those actions.

Consider this....

A female friend of yours is talking with her other female friends...

"Oh yeah, I'm friends with Bob. I know he's a male, but it's okay because he's one of the good ones."

If you over heard this, what would be your belief as to this group of women's opinions about men in general?
Click to expand...

That is misguided, but do those same people meet one of the good ones and refuse to acknowledge it?
 
thaiboxerken said:
This sounds like white-supremacist apologetics to me.
Click to expand...

It absolutely is. But apologetics are still reasoned arguments. If the position ultimately lacks hypocrisy, and they treat an ideological ally the same regardless of racial heritage, they are honest about it being an issue of culture.
 
Beelzebuddy said:
Fun fact: illegal immigration from Mexico has been a net negative since 2008. More are leaving than are coming. The biggest problem with illegal immigration is that there is no problem with illegal immigration, it's just been a baseless talking point for politicians to argue about for years.
Click to expand...
Isn't illegal immigration kind of an impossible thing to measure?

Otherwise it wouldn't be illegal
 
BobTheCoward said:
You can have preferred cultural standards and judge someone's adherence to them without consideration of the color of their skin or family of origin 1000 years ago.
Click to expand...

I would like to know what those standards are, what are used as sources, and how those standards are maintained over time. I'd also like to know what makes, say, Canadians and Americans fundamentally different or similar, ignoring the nation-states they are citizens of. Would this goal/ideal you advocate do away with St. Patrick's Day and green beer, Boston accents and the Texas drawl? No more Cajun cooking, and the same music style country-wide and on all stations?

I think you get the point: is homogeneity even possible, in what practical terms, and how is this reconciled with democracy?
 
BobTheCoward said:
That is misguided, but do those same people meet one of the good ones and refuse to acknowledge it?
Click to expand...

That you seem oblivious to why this is so inappropriate is staggering.

Again, the idea of there being "one of the good ones" implicitly implies that the greater majority of the group being talked about are not "Good Ones."

To believe that a group of people are bad just because of who they are is bigotry.
 
aleCcowaN said:
I dare to say that most Trump supporters know that what he proposes is not exactly true but more the like of short-lived guiding fictions. But it is to regret that anti-Trumpists here and over there find literal interpretations to be easier to criticize and they make a riot about them. The consequence being Trump supporters not able to express themselves freely here even in a thread that invite them to do so....
Click to expand...

I think you make an unwarranted assumption about the bulk of Trump supporters, who when asked do mention the literal policies quite often, apart from the general 'good feel' of white backlash.

That Trump's rhetoric may or may not refer to real action plans, some other set of actions of similar or compatible nature are reasonable to expect, insofar as there is actual policy being expressed; therefore, today's statements taken literally are valid surrogates for those policies and actions Trump is likely to attempt in the future.

As for safe spaces for proffering opinions without blow-back, I think the idea gravely mistaken. One should be able to offer cogent reasons for any given position; if they exist, some headway in shaping opinion can be made, if they do not, such policies and opinions ought to be properly debunked on a site such as ISF, and dismissed.

Finally, statements and rhetoric alone are quite enough to shape world opinion and affect international affairs. Trump is a candidate for office in a superpower with nukes and the world's largest military, a UN Security Council member, signatory to multiple treaties of its own earlier design, and a member of several alliances. Given that, loose rhetoric "a la Peron" isn't limited in its impact to the quaint tragic-comedy of Argentinian political dysfunction; rather, it affects the entire globe. A candidate for this office quite rightly should be taken to task for actions and words that are fairly indicative of his/her leadership attributes, or the lack thereof.
 
Beelzebuddy said:
Fun fact: illegal immigration from Mexico has been a net negative since 2008. More are leaving than are coming.
Click to expand...
Viva Mantequilla! :)

Beelzebuddy said:
The biggest problem with illegal immigration is that there is no problem with illegal immigration, it's just been a baseless talking point for politicians to argue about for years.
Click to expand...
I would think one of the problems with illegal immigration is that illegal immigrants undercut (union bargained) wages, thus putting pressure on the wages of ordinary Americans or of legal immigrants.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom