Words of Hate have consequences.
I wonder if Trump is capable of understanding that?
Or if he and his True Believers will rationalize
the death of these innocent men, women and
children away... :-(
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
116 comments:
And Antifa is caused by...
the blame game? really?
Since the Ohio shooter's sister was one of the victims, I think his motive will be much closer to home.
As for Antifa, I do not see them walking into malls shooting White people...
As long as Trump continues to vilify brown people as rapists, killers, drug dealers, invaders, etc... He owns events like this one.
Now the big question is what will he learn or do differently?
An Interesting Piece
If mental health is the problem, then it kinda seems like we need some sort of universal health care program that includes mental health treatment.
As someone who has fought anxiety for ~15 years...
I am not sure mental health treatment would help much.
That is because first the individual needs to acknowledge that they have a problem.
Then they need to seek medical / counseling help.
Finally they need to change their life style, stay on their meds, etc.
I am thinking many of these younger shooters are confident that they are healthy and doing the logical thing.
OK, well then you've got to do something about the guns.
Or, you throw your hands up and accept this as part of American life.
Here was my centrist gun control proposal…
Likely not acceptable to either side... :-)
Women and people of color also have mental health problems, but these shooters are almost invariably white men. Mental Health is not the issue.
Moose
Moose, these MASS shooters may be. But far and away the most shootings take place among minorities. Maybe it has to do with "white privilege" or just they are mentally more fragile, I don't know. But it doesn't have to do with white supremacy any more than it is about guns. It's derangement, and we have permitted it for too long. People intent on violating the laws against murder many times over are not going to be dissuaded by a misdemeanor gun law. Maybe Trump is right on this one.
Deflect! Deflect! Deflect!
Moose
If they are deranged, can we expect them to rationally be dissuaded by a "faster" death penalty?
About half of them get killed in the process, so no. As Old Judge Parker said, "It isn't the severity of the punishment [that deters] but the certainty of it." Madmen are deterred by nothing except swift death, either by police or by armed intended victims.
I still believe the greatest deterrent would be if we simply refused to publicly announce the name or likeness of the killer, refuse to publicly mourn and count the carnage, and basically deny them what they most seek-- fame.
Due process does seem counter productive in these cases.
And I think there is a lot more to this just wanting fame.
And I want to know who wrote this for our Bigot in Chief…
And how our chief stoker of hate, racism and bigotry said it with a straight face?
“In one voice, our nation must condemn racism, bigotry and white supremacy,” Trump said. “Hatred warps the mind, ravages the heart and devours the soul.”
The Bigot said that? You must assume he's lying, otherwise you can't call him a bigot.
Moose, that is both interesting and true. It seems that "colored folks" find reasons for their massive gun violence problem, but white folks seem to be off their nuts when they do it. It always amuses and disturbs me that so many ask "why" after these tragedies, yet no one is willing to say "craziness" as a complete answer. What kind of craziness, does it really matter?
Trump lies without hesitation. Why would that surprise you?
Personally I think this fits Trump to a T.
"bigot
: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices
especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance"
Jerry,
Most urban gun violence has to do with money, love or pride, and the victim knows the perpetrator.
Not so with these mass murders. That is why it is a special kind of hate or crazy.
Jerry,
By the way, you never took me up on my offer.
Pick one of these and we can research it to see if Trump or Politifact is lying
Please remember that Politifact give sources where as Trumps like you does not.
Trump chooses to go where he is not wanted.
Again, other countries have crazy people, but no mass shootings.
Moose
Moose, I think you are wrong. We have fostered a special kind of crazy in this country, where people believe that their grievances, whatever they may be, entitle them to take the lives of others with total disregard for the laws of God and of Man set against them. They find reward in the publicity generated afterward.
In other countries there are stiff gun laws, which does indeed limit mass shootings (but not eliminate them) and so there are more mass casualties from bombs, knives, and vehicles. Those are generally terrorist acts, something we seem to avoid pretty well after 9/11, but we didn't do it with gun laws.
We've had somewhere on the order of 250 terrorist attacks in this country this year alone, most perpetrated by white men.
Try another deflection.
Moose
You mis-classify. You wanted to call them mass shootings because of what, racism? You cannot now turn around and call them terrorist attacks-- two different things with two different objectives.
Tell that to the communities that have been terrorized.
Try again.
Moose
Nobody has been terrorized, that is the point. Crazies do crazy things for their own crazy reasons. There are not organizations "claiming credit" in the hopes of creating terror. Did the Klan "take credit" for any of these things? The most terroristic acts we have going are committed by Antifa these days. These one-offs pale in comparison.
"The most terroristic acts we have going are committed by Antifa these days."
Examples, please.
El Paso is pretty clearly a terrorist attack, in addition to being racist in motivation. Just read the dude's manifesto.
Potato or potahto…
What makes the USA different is the Lethal Nature of our easily accessible weapons.
"And the reality is because the AR15 type weapons are simply more lethal and can have bigger clips. They are very good for killing enemies, holding off Federal Marshals, killing zombies and killing innocent civilians... And they can be used accurately from longer distances than a hand gun. (ie from safe cover, possibly a hotel room) Now to check out what I think is a pretty straight forward hypothesis, I filtered MJs Mass Shooting Records for events where more than 10 people were killed in an attack since Columbine. The results:
•AR15: Avg Dead/Attack: 27 Avg Injured/Attack: 94
•Hand Guns: Avg Dead/Attack: 16 Avg Injured/Attack: 30
The simple fact is one has to be fairly close to effectively kill with a hand gun... Then some one who is "conceal and carrying" has a chance of playing Dirty Harry and killing the shooter. However in situations like Las Vegas, it did not matter who had hand guns on the ground.
And now that the Vegas shooter has raised the bar, maybe next time it will be at a high school football game, when the kids are in the parking lot after school or at bar close. I mean the crazy person just needs to camp out behind a wall at a higher elevation and it will be like shooting into a flock of ducks. Whether one of the ducks is carrying a hand gun or not."
And in countries without easy access to semi-automatic hand guns, the lethal score would be even lower.
Oh, whoop-te-do. AR-15 type rifles predominate in mass shootings. They happen to be the most common semi-auto rifle in America. It's like saying most voters are white. Contrary to popular belief they are not more lethal than any other semi-auto rifle, and the "large clip" (usually smaller than some handguns) is hardly an aid, since they can be switched in like two seconds--about 2-4 shots.
You're not addressing the problem, which is that a tiny few crazy people decide to violate the laws of God and man against mass murder. Just because it is easier to do does not mean the 99.9999% who do NOT should give up their freedoms.
Jerry,
Just keep telling yourself that...
G2A Gun Control Summary
Bump Fire Videos
So if the gun type does not matter.
Do you support legalizing automatic weapons for the private market?
Rationale?
Do you think the Dayton shooter should have had access to guns?
Moose
Moose,
Why do you think he should not have had a gun?
Dayton Ohio Shooter Search
Did I say that?
Moose
Your question was leading?
Why did you ask then?
"So if the gun type does not matter..."
Well, perhaps it does. Show me that every owner of an AR-15 (a generic name, by the way) goes out and commits a mass murder sometime during their lifetime, then gun type matters. Or if those AR-15s "automatically" just start shooting people, at some random time and place, all by themselves. They're "automatic weapons," right? :-\
And which of the 200 supposed mass shootings so far this year used a bump stock, something Trump has had banned?
This surprised me.https://townhall.com/tipsheet/cortneyobrien/2019/08/06/nyt-keeps-couldnt-decide-on-todays-el-paso-headline-n2551243
Jerry,
You avoid the hard question as usual. It is a simple yes or no...
So if the gun type does not matter. "Do you support legalizing automatic weapons for the private market? Rationale?"
How about rocket launchers?
I guess I would need to read the article to see which seemed most appropriate.
Trump Urges Unity vs Racism
Assailing Hate but Not Guns
After reading his speech, I agree that the updated headline is more accurate.
Townhall NYT El Paso Headline
Guardian NYT El Paso Headline
And for the 20th time...
How to Bump fire without a Bump fire stock
I was asking Jerry
Moose
John,
I think the first headline was fine after reading his speech. I tend to agree with a quote by Mollie Hemingway- The fact that several media and political figures were able to convince the paper to change its headline after the first edition exposes the collective outrage as a mob.
NYT Trump headline change 'scary' instance of bullying by online 'mob'.
NYT is a liberal paper and even they are afraid of the left.
Molly
Folks on the right complain about media coverage all the time. Why is it wrong for people on the left to do so?
Molly,
I searched by the word unity and it only showed up once in the whole speech.
"Now is the time to set destructive partisanship aside so destructive and find the courage to answer hatred with unity, devotion, and love. Our future is in our control. America will rise to the challenge, we will always have, and we always will win. The choice is ours and ours alone. It is not up to mentally ill monsters; it is up to us. If we are able to pass great legislation after all of these years, we will ensure that those who were attacked will not have died in vain."
And unfortunately Trump after ~3 years of divisive speeches, ratcheting up fear of immigrants, and reactive tirades has no credibility when he says those words. :-)
Sean,
I think the question is "why" the NYT's changed the headline?
Did they become aware that a mistake / error had been made?
Were they caving to be politically correct?
Some of Trump's non-unity / non-loving comments
Media outlets cater to the right wing all the time. Again, why is this such a big deal?
Sean,
The majority of media outlets are biased toward the left. VOX is frequently used as a source on this blog and it is very one-sided.
Molly
Because the NYT is already scoring a little Left of Center. I would prefer that they not become the next FOX...
"Because the NYT is already scoring a little Left of Center. I would prefer that they not become the next FOX..."
But even you think the updated headline is more accurate. Maybe the people complaining actually, you know, had a point?
Hi Molly,
I try to pick the VOX pieces very carefully.
Their opinion pieces are biased, but they include a lot of useful data and charts in their Explainer pieces.
Not something I do not find on FOX, Townhall, etc.
Those folks just want to spin the message.
Sean,
I am fine with what NYT did.
It is their paper.
You just suggested they caved in order to be politically correct, even though you agree the change was more accurate.
I do not know their actual intent. Do you?
Here is what they say.
"New York Times executive editor Dean Baquet said senior editors quickly recognized problems with the original headline Monday and rewrote it, and he insisted the adjustment was not a reaction to scolding from Democratic presidential candidates. “I don’t need the entire political field to tell me we wrote a bad headline. It was evident,” Baquet said in an interview Tuesday."
I agree with him, but the Far Left and Far Right like conspiracies... :-)
"I do not know their actual intent."
The change made the headline more accurate. Why are you trying to parse intent, other than it's another case of "John trying to bash what he perceives as the Left".
https://www.dennisprager.com/how-to-tell-if-a-trump-supporter-is-racist/
John,
Do you have issues with this townhall article?
Molly
Prager? LOL
Moose
TH Trump Racist?
"Every non-liberal leftist — that is, nearly every Democrat running for president, New York Times and Washington Post columnist, CNN and MSNBC host, and your left-wing brother-in-law — labels every Trump supporter and, of course, President Donald Trump, a “racist.”
And they don’t stop there. Leftists don’t only label the half of the country that supports the president “racist,” they label all whites and America itself “racist.” If your son or daughter attends or recently attended an American university, it is close to certain he or she was repeatedly told that America and all whites are racist. According to the left, whites are divided between those who admit they are racist and those who don’t admit it.
Every conservative and many liberals know this is a big lie. The great question is: Do leftists believe it? It is impossible to know. But this we do know: If you repeat something often enough, and if your Weltanschauung (worldview) and that which gives your life meaning are dependent upon believing something, you will eventually believe it.
So here is a way to show it is a lie.
Ask any white conservative, including one who supports Trump, the following three questions:
1) Do you have more in common with, and are you personally more comfortable in the company of, a white leftist or a black conservative?
2) Would you rather have nine white leftists or nine black conservatives on the U.S. Supreme Court?
3) Would you rather your child marry a black Christian conservative or a white non-Christian liberal?
A white racist would prefer the whites in each case.
I have asked these questions of thousands of Trump supporters at lectures and on my radio show. Not once has a white Trump-supporting conservative said he or she would be more comfortable in the presence of a white leftist than a black conservative, or would prefer an all-white liberal Supreme Court to an all-black conservative Supreme Court. Not once has a white Christian conservative said he or she would prefer their child marry a white non-Christian liberal to a black Christian conservative.
If you’re an honest leftist, this should present a powerful challenge to your belief that all white conservatives are racist.
But it won’t. Leftists have too much at stake to confront the truth about conservatives. Everything the left has ever believed has depended upon lying about opponents. From the day Stalin labeled Trotsky — who served as the head of the Red Army and who, along with Lenin, founded the Bolshevik Party — a “fascist,” leftists have lied about their opponents.
Some liberals lie and some conservatives lie, but the truth is both a liberal and conservative value. It has never been a left-wing value. Any leftist who would commit himself to the truth would cease being a leftist. He would either become an anti-left liberal or an anti-left conservative.
“America is racist.” “Whites are racist.” “Trump supporters are racist.” These are all big lies.
So, then, given how important it is to leftists to maintain the lie of conservative racism — along with xenophobia, misogyny, transphobia and Islamophobia — how would they rebut conservatives’ answers to these questions?
Presumably, they would argue that every conservative who responds to these questions as I described is lying.
But these questions are important — no matter how much leftists ignore or dismiss them — because they perform an important service for conservatives.
I know this from Jewish history. There was so much Jew-hatred in the medieval Christian world that Jews sometimes wondered if there was any truth to the attacks on them. When a whole society denigrates a group, members of the denigrated group start wondering whether any of the attacks on them have any truth. But when the charge of blood libel — that Jews killed Christian children to use their blood to bake matzos for Passover — arose, it liberated Jews from taking any of the anti-Semites’ attacks seriously. Every Jew knew the blood libel was a lie — Jews never consumed animal blood, let alone human blood.
Every conservative knows his responses to these three questions are heartfelt and true, so these questions can help conservatives come to see the left’s charge of conservative racism as medieval Jews came to see the anti-Semites’ blood libel charge: as a lie."
Molly,
I'll look it over, but I am pretty certain that Trump is very racist, and I have the pictures to prove it. :-)
Molly,
I read the whole painful thing... It is a typical Far Right rant.
Here are my issues with it.
- No facts, data, graphs charts, etc. Just opinions and "trust me's"
- full of absolute words.
"Every non-liberal leftist … labels every Trump supporter and, of course, President Donald Trump, a “racist.”
"Leftists don’t only label the half of the country that supports the president “racist,” they label all whites and America itself “racist.”"
- the questions are incorrect, they should adjust only one factor
"Do you have more in common with, and are you personally more comfortable in the company of, a white or a black person?"
Here is a Heritage piece that critiques an implicit bias test that you may be interested in taking.
Of course the author is NOT a psychologist, but a lawyer...
They have a link in the critique, but here is a direct link to the test.
More regarding implicit bias.
Here is a PDF version.
The MythBusters section on ~pg 4 is excellent.
The Mythbusters makes sense. I looked at the test and I think you’ve had it on the blog before. I could be wrong.
In other articles he talks about how leftists and liberals have almost nothing in common. Just so you know, when the article says leftist it does not mean liberal. I brought him up because he has PragerU and he does 5 minute videos on a variety of subjects with presenters with a diverse set of views( liberal, conservative, independent).
Also to mention how the media is censoring people. One of his videos about the Bible was put in the porn category by Google. He testified to Congress. Candace Owens seems to be a voice of reason and has been censored on YouTube.
I know I’m kind of all over the board here. But would you call Candace Owens a far right ranter?
Ok, I’m done.
Molly
Prager is not a reliable source for anything. His videos are full of inaccuracies and logical fallacies.
Moose
Molly,
Based on the couple of Prager pieces you have guided me to. I would not rely on him for information. And if you read him for fun, make sure you check his rationale, facts, etc.
By the way, you did not comment on my issues raised?
As for Candace, I have only heard her speak a couple of times and was not impressed.
It looks like she hasfewer qualifications than even AOC.
At least she stuck with it and got her college degree with honors.
Now I like watching FOX when Kat Timpf is on because she is funny and hot… That does not mean I respect her knowledge or opinions. :-)
From Laurie, it seems to fit better here...
Molly, I am curious if you think Trump is racist. I am curious because John and Jerry are the only conservatives that I discuss politics with.
Laurie,
I don’t know if he is or he is not. I don’t think he was called a racist until he got into politics. In my opinion the label racist is used as a weapon now. People are calling Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden racist and the overuse is concerning.
John,
Sorry, I unplugged for a few days.
You have a good point, he has no graphs, charts, etc. and uses too many ‘every’, ‘all’ statements. Many news outlets and political figures label all conservatives or Trump supporters as racist. I just don’t see how black conservatives can be racist. I see you have posted some
new posts on media and so forth so I’ll read through those.
Molly
Molly,
Actually a long history of discrimination and racism concerns follow Trump.
The word racist is over used and very poorly defined.
Don't let the Far Left and Far Right people mislead you.
And yet if Trump does think that White Christians are better than other humans from Africa, Central America, etc and we support him... What does that make us?
Molly,
And if not discrimination and/or racism, why do you think his employees and nominees are so not diverse?
I spend a lot of time leading teams...
The best teams and results are when there are people in the room who compliment my strengths / weaknesses and see things differently than me.
Yes, but there is a huge difference between different perspectives and strengths, and skin color/gender as the sole determinant of what one thinks. "Racist" presumes to know one's thoughts, or to judge someone solely by some action which may have no basis in skin color whatsoever. It's bogus and it is dangerous. Once everybody is a racist, nobody is. Time to trot out MLK's speech.
Trump has a long track record of racist actions and comments. If you support a person who does racist things, you are also a racist. There is no need to equivocate.
Moose
Racist: a person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another.
Jerry,
Why then do you believe that Trump surrounds himself with White folks?
Why do you think that he repeatedly vilifies Mexico and Asylum seekers, when the data paints a very different story?
Moose,
Trump loves that broad brush you are using. He turns it around and reminds his base that the Far Left are angry irrational people.
Moose, I offer you a choice. Are you:
1. Spreading a lie, or
2. Spreading a damnable lie?
John, has it ever occurred to you that "white folks" just MIGHT be the best qualified for the job, despite their skin color? And you haven't addressed the fact that at least one of the top Trump corporation executives is a black female, another a black male, and a few others are female, plus you've ignored Ben Carson, Alex Acosta (Hispanic) and Elaine Chao (Asian female) in the cabinet.
Jerry,
That is possible, but unfortunately I doubt it given his long questionable history.
And please remember that he is a terrible Boss who does not hire "the best people", otherwise he would not have the incredibly high turnover that he has had. And a lot of them departed under a cloud of scandal.
And there are some of his past comments
For all my concerns, I do agree that he is an excellent manipulator.
He has no issue with saying whatever he needs to to further his agenda.
Let's just hope his agenda is good for the vast majority of Americans.
hope? is that all you've got?
Yes, I have spent time with self focused people like Trump.
Trump is for Trump, not you and not me... :-(
How unfortunate for you. I have spent time with People like Trump, and the only "hope" I have is that the Democrats get trounced in the next election and stop obstructing all the good this guy is trying so hard to do. He's focused on solving the problem.
If he was. he would have been working on draining the swamp instead hiring so many greedy self centered people like himself.
Remember back when he used to complain about Obama's vacation and how he would stay in the White House working diligently?
Instead he spends a lot of time traveling to his properties. For which I assume us tax payers are paying Trump enterprises huge dollars.
Would you have been okay with Obama travelling this much and having all the staff / security paying him to stay with him?
By the way, what problem is he solving?
- he has spending at record highs
- he has deficits at $1 Trillion/year and climbing
- he has us in trade wars with no solution in sight
- he has us out various agreements with now replacement in sight
- he has passed no infrastructure plan
- he has no improved healthcare plan
And... How are the DEMs going to get trounced and removed from control of the House?
It isn't like Trump and/or the GOP are doing anything to grow their support...
“Historians have a word for Germans who joined the Nazi party, not because they hated Jews, but out of a hope for restored patriotism, or a sense of economic anxiety, or a hope to preserve their religious values, or dislike of their opponents, or raw political opportunism, or convenience, or ignorance, or greed.
That word is “Nazi.” Nobody cares about their motives anymore.
They joined what they joined. They lent their support and their moral approval. And, in so doing, they bound themselves to everything that came after. Who cares any more what particular knot they used in the binding?”
Moose
This seems an interesting piece.
So is your premise that everyone who supported Hitler was a "mass murdering racist socio or psycho path"? Thus they should be called "mass murdering racist socio or psycho paths"?
It seems from your comment that you want to label and stereotype 45% of the US population with that "broad brush".
"Trump has a long track record of racist actions and comments. If you support a person who does racist things, you are also a racist. There is no need to equivocate." Moose
Based on the definition... Does your prejudice against rural White people make you a Racist?
Racist: a person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another.
I’m labeling people who do racist things and their supporters as Racist. It’s a very simple concept. No need for you to try to imagine what I mean.
And what, exactly, is my prejudice against rural white people?
And the premise of my previous comment is also simple: that those who supported Hitler and his regime were Nazis. No one now cares about the reasons they did so.
It couldn’t be more clear.
Moose
So, 45% of the people, white, black and brown are racists, simply because they voted for Trump? Did they also vote for anybody else, white, black or brown? Can one be "half racist"? Who did you vote for, lily-white Hillary?
Moose,
Keep stereotyping and broad brushing, Trump will thank you.
Fortunately or unfortunately, and unfortunately or fortunately, Moose is not unique in his painfully poisonous attitude.
I was wondering if he also labels all Roman Catholics pedophiles now?
Or are the people who like Harvey Weinstein films sexual predators?
And I really miss seeing Kevin Spacey in movies. Does that make me like young attractive men?
Can someone be a “half-Nazi”?
The Roman Catholic Church is not a pedophile. There are men within—and without— the Church that have been and are pedophiles. They are correctly and rightly not supported by most Catholics.
Moose
(8)=X Label for Moose's outlook.
Trump's words have consequence for him also.
This is a good piece
Tee-hee. Somebody that is completely blind to race makes a comment based on the behavior of a particular person and somehow, if that person is "of color," that someone is a RAAACIIISSST. Bullpuckey. When everything and everybody is racist, nobody is, and that race card is getting pretty worn out.
Who is saying that EVERYONE is racist? Be specific.
Moose
Moose,
You are claiming that all supporters of Trump are Racist.
The majority of Rural White people support Trump.
"I’m labeling people who do racist things and their supporters as Racist. It’s a very simple concept. No need for you to try to imagine what I mean. And what, exactly, is my prejudice against rural white people?"
And I believe that you are Racist for applying such a broad prejudiced brush to people you do not know. I mean you certainly feel superior.
Racist: a person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another.
I think you have come pretty close, saying everybody that voted for Trump is a racist. Or a Nazi. We're going to have to invoke Godwin's law pretty soon, and add a corollary for race to it.
"I’m labeling people who do racist things and their supporters as Racist. It’s a very simple concept. No need for you to try to imagine what I mean. And what, exactly, is my prejudice against rural white people?"
That's right. So, CLEARLY, to anyone with a brain, that means that I consider people who DON'T do those things NOT RACIST. So..."When everything and everybody is racist, nobody is, and that race card is getting pretty worn out."...is false or meaningless. There are lots of people who aren't racist.
You support racist policies. Both of you.
There are over half a million illegal European immigrants living and working in the U.S. You NEVER talk about them. Trump NEVER talks about them. There have been no ICE raids on THEIR places of work. Gee, I wonder why not?
Moose
You can invoke Godwin's law if you want, but Godwin himself said you should call a Nazi a Nazi.
Moose
I am pretty sure I have written about visa over stayers before, but you are correct that Trump does not seem to make much noise about them.
Of course they did get a back ground check, entered through a border checkpoint, passed security and had obtained permission before coming. Where as people who just show up or violate our borders are a different thing all together.
Now you make your negative judgmental feelings known about rural citizens and Trump voters regularly... You look down on them as less than you and your peers. I believe this definition fits you to a T.
"Racist: a person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another."
By the way, one can be Racist against their own Race...
And you are correct... That Godwin agreed White Supremacists are Nazis.
I have not heard of his approval of comparing Trump and 45% of Americans to Nazis.
Nazi=White Supremacist=Trump
That was easy.
Again. What are my “negative judgmental feelings” about rural citizens? Be specific. You’ll have to quote me.
Moose
Let's continue your equivalency silliness...
Nazi = White Supremacist = Trump = Trump Supporter = Rural citizens / 45% of American citizens...
One source
Source 2
" Trump led Clinton by 32 points among all white men nationally (63% to 31%), but he beat the Democrat by 48 points among white men living in rural areas (72% to 24%)."
Darn... That is a lot of White Supremacists!!!
Are you willing to back away from your prejudiced stereotyping yet?
What about the 12% of blacks or 29% of Hispanics that support Trump. Are they white supremacists or racists? Isn't black and Hispanic unemployment the lowest since 1969? If Trump is a racist, he's making a horrible muck of it.
What do you call someone who supports racist actions? Perhaps it's a failure of language.
Moose
I see two categories:
1) Racist
2) Okay with racists/racism as long as I get what I want
Both are contemptible.
Moose
Continuing here
Post a Comment