Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by WBZ144)
    You can be a bigot towards a religious group, which he is. I didn't call him a racist with regards to his views towards Muslims. What makes him a likely racist is his derogatory views about Mexicans, the way he refuses to denounce his KKK supporters and the way he insisted that Obama was not born in America, attempting to prove his claim was true. Could you see him doing the same with a White president?
    You may not have realised but he already has done the same against a white presidential candidate, Ted Cruz. :toofunny:
    Trump claims, now proved falsely, that Cruz cannot be the president because he is Canadian.
    http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articl...e-constitution
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Peroxidation)
    "Xenophobe," "bigot," "racist." So many incorrectly used terms in this thread. It's obvious the 'liberals' (aka fascists) are feeling a little overwhelmed by our objective analysis of what Trump says which is debunking everything they're saying. Such insults are used only when a liberal knows they are losing the argument.
    PRSOM, Labeling everything to silence it is, in a mild form, fascism, but hey it's popular on TSR and the mods like it so what's wrong.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A$aprocky)
    1) proof that you did say there are 'plenty of people'..
    I never denied this.

    (Original post by A$aprocky)
    2) If you're gonna say there are a considerable number of people that are forced into such groups, im gonna need proof.
    Your starting to build a strawman there. What I'm concerned with is whether there it's possible for a person to be associated with an organization, and not agree with said organization. The threshold for me is very small, similar to Capital punishment, where even if one innocent person is treated as Guilty, that is enough for me to disagree with capital punishment.

    I will admit it will be difficult to get statistics on how many people are in this situation, because it's not something you can really check for.

    (Original post by A$aprocky)
    Dont make assumptions based on fascist groups that exist in the past. Hitler youth - They werent forced, they agreed with the fascist views. ISIS - Whilst they are forced to work for them, doesnt mean they are part of ISIS. Only those who agree with the radical views 'join' ISIS

    Thats why I gave the example of Prussian Blue. Various members of Scientology being other examples. This isn't just specific to extremist groups. If someone can be, for example, a registered member of the Labour party but not actually support their leader or all of their policies, I see no reason why this wouldn't apply to other groups.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    [QUOTE=Farm_Ecology;63588413]I never denied this.



    Your starting to build a strawman there. What I'm concerned with is whether there it's possible for a person to be associated with an organization, and not agree with said organization. The threshold for me is very small, similar to Capital punishment, where even if one innocent person is treated as Guilty, that is enough for me to disagree with capital punishment.

    I will admit it will be difficult to get statistics on how many people are in this situation, because it's not something you can really check for.


    (Original post by Farm_Ecology)
    I never denied this.



    Your starting to build a strawman there. What I'm concerned with is whether there it's possible for a person to be associated with an organization, and not agree with said organization. The threshold for me is very small, similar to Capital punishment, where even if one innocent person is treated as Guilty, that is enough for me to disagree with capital punishment.

    I will admit it will be difficult to get statistics on how many people are in this situation, because it's not something you can really check for.




    Thats why I gave the example of Prussian Blue. Various members of Scientology being other examples. This isn't just specific to extremist groups. If someone can be, for example, a registered member of the Labour party but not actually support their leader or all of their policies, I see no reason why this wouldn't apply to other groups.
    You cant make statements if you have no proof.

    Your labour party comparison is wrong too. Maybe they wont agree with the leader or the policies but they generally are left wing. A right wing person wont support labour.

    Being associated with a group means the person agrees with the general ideas of the group. You're spiralling of the original argument now, scraping the bottom of the barrel for points. I've provided rebuttal to your points and you've simply ignored them and just wasted my time

    I think ive demonstrated the stupidity behind your argument, please dont continue, you're just wasting your own time trying to argue something so fundementally wrong.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by balanced)
    You may not have realised but he already has done the same against a white presidential candidate, Ted Cruz. :toofunny:
    Trump claims, now proved falsely, that Cruz cannot be the president because he is Canadian.
    http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articl...e-constitution
    That's different because Obama was actually born in the US but Trump claimed that he was lying and sent "investigators" over to Hawaii to prove it. Obama even ended up producing a copy of his birth certificate to shut Trump up.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Peroxidation)
    "Xenophobe," "bigot," "racist." So many incorrectly used terms in this thread. It's obvious the 'liberals' (aka fascists) are feeling a little overwhelmed by our objective analysis of what Trump says which is debunking everything they're saying. Such insults are used only when a liberal knows they are losing the argument.
    What is there to analyse? Everything that he says is utterly simplistic for his simple-minded supporters.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WBZ144)
    What is there to analyse? Everything that he says is utterly simplistic for his simple-minded supporters.
    This is what I'm talking about. You're clearly too far gone to realize your own fascism. Trump has done nothing wrong, the only reason you think he has is because you're slurping up all of the 'liberals' dribble and aren't actually analyzing things for yourself.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A$aprocky)
    You cant make statements if you have no proof.
    I have provided several examples of people who are members or associated with groups but do not agree with them.

    (Original post by A$aprocky)
    Your labour party comparison is wrong too. Maybe they wont agree with the leader or the policies but they generally are left wing. A right wing person wont support labour.
    Again, no. You can be a member of the labour party and not actively support them. You might even vote conservative.

    (Original post by A$aprocky)
    Being associated with a group means the person agrees with the general ideas of the group. You're spiralling of the original argument now, scraping the bottom of the barrel for points. I've provided rebuttal to your points and you've simply ignored them and just wasted my time
    You havent provided any points, you've just kept insisting that a persons views are defined by their membership, and not their views. I've tried to explain why this isn't the case. A persons membership reflects their views, not the other way around.

    (Original post by A$aprocky)
    please dont continue, you're just wasting your own time.
    I agree with this part. This is getting ridiculous.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Farm_Ecology)
    I have provided several examples of people who are members or associated with groups but do not agree with them.



    Again, no. You can be a member of the labour party and not actively support them. You might even vote conservative.
    Seriously? You must be joking right?

    [/QUOTE]You havent provided any points, you've just kept insisting that a persons views are defined by their membership, and not their views. I've tried to explain why this isn't the case. A persons membership reflects their views, not the other way around.
    [/QUOTE]
    You've now contradicted yourself. Please, your argument is over.

    [/QUOTE]I agree with this part. This is getting ridiculous.[/QUOTE]
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by balanced)
    He isn't irrationally against illegal immigrants, so he isn't xenophobic.
    He's against all immigration, I'd say that qualifies.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sunni money)
    And thank for subsequently conceding that many of the points you raised do not show that he is a racist.
    Spoiler:
    Show



    I've just alerted the good people at the Oxford English dictionary that the definition of many has now been changed to mean 3. Thank you for your contribution to the English language.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Peroxidation)
    "Xenophobe," "bigot," "racist." So many incorrectly used terms in this thread. It's obvious the 'liberals' (aka fascists) are feeling a little overwhelmed by our objective analysis of what Trump says which is debunking everything they're saying. Such insults are used only when a liberal knows they are losing the argument.
    You cannot use "liberal" interchangeably with "fascist". That is stupid, although I agree with the sentiments behind it - in that many who oppose Trump do so on emotionally-charged grounds, and have no actual arguments to substantiate many of the assertions they make about him (illustrated in this thread).

    (Original post by dean01234)
    He's against all immigration, I'd say that qualifies.
    Source?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A$aprocky)
    Seriously? You must be joking right?
    No. I for example, am a member of the Socialist party, but have never voted for them, nor agree with their policies.

    (Original post by A$aprocky)
    You've now contradicted yourself. Please, your argument is over.
    Once again, no I havent.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Farm_Ecology)
    No. I for example, am a member of the Socialist party, but have never voted for them, nor agree with their policies.



    Once again, no I havent.
    1) Wtaf. I have no words. You're not very rational, but im assuming a certain level of rationality.

    2) look what i put in bold: What you said: A persons membership reflects their views, not the other way around.

    Give up please.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OMG TOOTHBRUSH)
    Serious question. Does anyone have any specific examples of him being racist they can give? I bet the answer is no.

    Here's a first hand account of one of his rallies from a black American:

    https://www.facebook.com/Tatumbug34/...8608861209475/

    Im sorry dude but you sound like you want to anal penetrate him in the ass
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Largely for poor choice of words. I haven't seen anything to suggest genuine racism just he used vague words that seemed to generalise certain racial groups.

    That could be evidence of racism but it isn't particularly strong.

    That and he has been a bit ignorant when it comes to some more serious things.

    Like failing to condemn white supremacist support, then condemning it, then claiming he hadn't made any mention of it.

    Or like when he posted false infomation from accounts with connections to racists ideologies.

    Personally I am no fan of the man, I doubt he would be a good president but the accusations of racism seem weak at best.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Peroxidation)
    This is what I'm talking about. You're clearly too far gone to realize your own fascism. Trump has done nothing wrong, the only reason you think he has is because you're slurping up all of the 'liberals' dribble and aren't actually analyzing things for yourself.
    Last time I checked free speech goes both ways. We are just as free to call him out on his views as he is to express them. One could just as easily say that it's "fascist" to voice your dislike for liberals if we were to go by the context in which you used the word.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sunni money)
    Source?
    My bad - not all immigration. Just a **** off big wall to keep the mexicans out.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sunni money)
    Businesses often discriminate against different groups of consumers (e.g. male/female at clubs).


    The onus is on you to prove that he did so in a way that made it racist - a good step would be to substantiate some of your assertions.
    When a club discriminates based on gender, thats sexist. If they were to do it based on race, that would be racist.

    When Trumps real estate company (which he was managing at the time) tells black people that there aren't any apartments available and then went and showed white people around available apartments. Thats racist. When they coded applications based on color and told black people that prices were higher than they really were. Thats racist.

    Trump settled the case and then changed operating practices.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Peroxidation)
    "Xenophobe," "bigot," "racist." So many incorrectly used terms in this thread. It's obvious the 'liberals' (aka fascists) are feeling a little overwhelmed by our objective analysis of what Trump says which is debunking everything they're saying. Such insults are used only when a liberal knows they are losing the argument.
    This argument only exists because of people wanting to get specific on the definition of racism.

    Whether Donald Trump is actually racist or trying to win votes, is yet to be proven. No discussion exists about whether Trump is a douchebag or not. Here's something for you to objectively analyse: Trump suggested (in an interview) breaking the Geneva convention to bomb families of terrorists. He would commit mass murder on civilians. Keep all technicalities of racism you want, he's a vile creature.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.