Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

If you are black and you support Donald Trump, you are a "Mediocre Negro". Watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Palmyra)
    Why not? BLM fosters extreme hatred of the police, thus it is totally reasonable for an easily influenced and angry BLM individual to then indiscriminately kill police officers (of many races - including Black) as a result.
    That's not true. Here's their website: http://blacklivesmatter.com/

    The entire premise of your argument hangs on some protest boards. Your argument is weak and petty.

    (Original post by Palmyra)
    Indeed you did, and this does nothing to negate the substance of the Breitbart article, let alone the other 4 articles.
    If you chose to read my entire reply instead of picking and choosing what you reply to, you would have seen that i've already addressed all the articles and debunked it.

    But for the sake of you, I will address it. First of all, these people are a product of their time where they faced genuine oppression and the cops at the time were also murderers protected by the state. But let's ignore that.

    But the whole premise of that article is that BLM uphold them for being cop killers, which is simply not true, let alone uphold them in the first place.

    Now, try not to cherry pick what you choose to reply to. It is making you look like weak and silly really.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    You're looking at it the wrong way. Maybe conservative black people didn't think overblown melodramatic non-issues hyped up by liberals were enough for them to switch over to voting for Clinton, a sleazy corrupt crook.
    It's the same for women. Many women aren't screeching social justice warriors who take offence at anything and everything, and many women too gossip about men in a sexual manner, so they appreciate locker room talk is sometimes just that. So Trump being a misogynist isn't going to stop them voting for him if they're naturally conservative. Especially when the alternative is Hilary Clinton, whose husband is a rapist.
    Many Hispanics came over the US legally and integrated and aren't happy that others are getting a free ride, so again, no matter how much Liberals accuse Trump of racism it doesn't invalidate their concerns over illegal immigration.
    I'm no fan of the Clintons but if Bill is a rapist because of the accusations, Trump is as well when we apply the same standard of proof to him. After all, he has had even more accussations of rape and sexual assault against him. And if you think that what he said is merely "locker room talk"then there is something wrong with you.

    But almost 90% of Black voters voted for Clinton nonetheless. If an overwhelming majority still picked her over Trump, he must really be bad.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BobBobson)
    The sooner you realise that this movement has no racial boundaries, the easier it'll be to accept the demise of the left. Labour have no chance, and now the Democrats are completely BTFO. Something big is coming.
    Considering that Trump failed to secure more than a very small percentage of the Black vote, I wouldn't say that it has no racial boundaries.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joe cooley)
    Or maybe they looked at places like Chicago and realized that the Democrat
    party aren't doing well for blacks?
    As opposed when they were thriving under Republican rule? I can understand how voting for African Americans is probably like being between a rock and a hard place, so the majority end up going for those who at least do not express outright animosity towards them. After all, nearly half of Trump supporters have negative views of Blacks and the former editor of Breitbart was helping to run his campaign. Hardly surprising.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joe cooley)
    Fortunately, just like the British working class who are rejecting the left in ever greater numbers, American blacks are coming to the realisation that the left care for black votes, not black people.

    Obviously, there are low information minions out there who believe that Clinton was the best choice for blacks.

    A woman who referred to blacks as "super predators" who was married to the US president responsible for incarcerating blacks in numbers never seen before.

    Yeah,right.
    Replace left with establishment Democrats and i totally agree. People like Shillary, Corey Booker and to an extent even Obama, couldn't care less about the interests of working class, or even middle class people. They're there to serve the interests of their donors.

    But to then imply the Republicans are any different? That's just disingenuous. They're exactly the same, apart from they barely even pretend to care about anyone but the mega rich.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zargabaath)
    Replace left with establishment Democrats and i totally agree. People like Shillary, Corey Booker and to an extent even Obama, couldn't care less about the interests of working class, or even middle class people. They're there to serve the interests of their donors.

    But to then imply the Republicans are any different? That's just disingenuous. They're exactly the same, apart from they barely even pretend to care about anyone but the mega rich.
    Agreed,upto a point.

    The establishment Dem/Rep's are cheeks of the same arse.

    However, the Dem/left position themselves as the champions of black Americans.

    Pure BS.

    Illegal immigration for example, which demographic is most impacted by the hoards of cheap unskilled labour flooding into the US,do you think ?

    Yet the left support and encourage illegal immigration.

    Like the British working class,American blacks need to wake up to the fact that the left is anything but their friend.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WBZ144)
    I'm no fan of the Clintons but if Bill is a rapist because of the accusations, Trump is as well when we apply the same standard of proof to him. After all, he has had even more accussations of rape and sexual assault against him. And if you think that what he said is merely "locker room talk"then there is something wrong with you.

    But almost 90% of Black voters voted for Clinton nonetheless. If an overwhelming majority still picked her over Trump, he must really be bad.
    Bill settled out of court. After the election all of Trump's accusers conveniently withdrew their claims or disappeared. Not that any of that stops the liberal left from calling Trump a racist or sexual abuser, which is kind of my point. Bill Clinton is actually one, so why shouldn't that stop people voting for Clinton?

    No, I simply live in the real world, not a liberal snowflake bubble. Men objectify women and women think of men as hunks of meat. Trump doesn't advocate any crimes against women, in fact he says women let him do stuff to them. So yeah, locker room talk.

    You're moving the goal posts. 90% of black voters are Democrat regardless. Clinton's black vote was down on Obama by five points and Trump's was up on Romney by a point. Clinton also lost ground in the Asian vote, Hispanic vote and the white vote. She lost ground everywhere. It could indicate America is racist, but then they probably wouldn't have previously elected a black president for two terms. It's probably more to do with Clinton being a sleazy corrupt establishment crook. That's more of a turnoff than Trump being a nationalistic misogynist.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    Bill settled out of court. After the election all of Trump's accusers conveniently withdrew their claims or disappeared. Not that any of that stops the liberal left from calling Trump a racist or sexual abuser, which is kind of my point. Bill Clinton is actually one, so why shouldn't that stop people voting for Clinton?

    No, I simply live in the real world, not a liberal snowflake bubble. Men objectify women and women think of men as hunks of meat. Trump doesn't advocate any crimes against women, in fact he says women let him do stuff to them. So yeah, locker room talk.

    You're moving the goal posts. 90% of black voters are Democrat regardless. Clinton's black vote was down on Obama by five points and Trump's was up on Romney by a point. Clinton also lost ground in the Asian vote, Hispanic vote and the white vote. She lost ground everywhere. It could indicate America is racist, but then they probably wouldn't have previously elected a black president for two terms. It's probably more to do with Clinton being a sleazy corrupt establishment crook. That's more of a turnoff than Trump being a nationalistic misogynist.
    Not shifting goalposts, just correcting your implication that more than a very small percentage of Black voters chose Trump. Obama had an edge to him because not only was he the first African American president, he was charismatic and had a much more likeable personality than Clinton, if the polls are anything to go by. Trump won fewer votes than both Clinton and Romney, so it's not as though he was exactly popular. She was simply unpopular yet still managed to get almost 3 million votes more. That does say a lot about Trump.

    The last time I checked, Summer Zervos did not go away. She is still pursuing a lawsuit against him. The others might not be getting as much coverage, although I would have to look into that. Moreover, Trump has settled lawsuits for fraud and for refusing to rent to African Americans. So going by your standard of proof, he is a fraud and a racist.

    Not just the liberals were disgusted by it, many conservatives were outraged as well. Decent people would be disgusted by a man saying that he just grabs women by the genitals and "doesn't even wait". The part in inverted comas is important, that is the part that implies lack of consent. No one cares about immature bragging of sexual conquests, but do not compare the two. Then there is the fact that he admitted to creepily going into the dressing rooms during beauty pageants when the girls were dressing, and that his status allowed him to do so. He has pretty much admitted to being a sexual predator, but I still wouldn't say that the accusations by those women against him were true unless they are proven to be.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WBZ144)
    Not shifting goalposts, just correcting your implication that more than a very small percentage of Black voters chose Trump. Obama had an edge to him because not only was he the first African American president, he was charismatic and had a much more likeable personality than Clinton, if the polls are anything to go by. Trump won fewer votes than both Clinton and Romney, so it's not as though he was exactly popular. She was simply unpopular yet still managed to get almost 3 million votes more. That does say a lot about Trump.
    That wasn't my implication at all- this is a strawman fallacy you've invented. Your original claim centred specifically on the 8% of Black Americans that did vote for Trump. My response focused again on Black conservatives, and why they, small voter base or not, did not desert the Republican party.
    Yes, Obama was the first African-American president, which directly contradicts your notion of racism. The same electorate that voted for a black guy to be president is now suddenly racist because they don't like Clinton? Yeah, okay.

    Trump gained 2 million more votes than Mitt Romney did in 2012, so wrong again. The electoral college being what it is, Trump made no attempt to campaign in California and New York, two liberal strongholds the account for more than the entirety of Clinton's popular vote lead, but he did flip numerous blue states.
    You can try and spin it however you want, but the fact remains that there was shift towards Trump this election from the Democrats.

    (Original post by WBZ144)
    The last time I checked, Gloria Allred did not go away. She is still pursuing a lawsuit against him. The others might not be getting as much coverage, although I would have to look into that. Moreover, Trump has settled lawsuits for fraud and for refusing to rent to African Americans. So going by your standard of proof, he is a fraud and a racist.
    Gloria Allred is pursuing one claim, what of the others?
    That's not my standard of proof- I'm pointing out liberal hypocrisy. Regardless, Trump could well be any and all of those things. The whole point is that it doesn't negate why people vote for him. What Liberals continue to fail to understand is that not everyone is a whiny melodramatic drama queen. Black conservatives want jobs and immigration reform. That's why Trump appealed to them. They don't care if he got sued by the DOJ over his company's letting practices forty years ago. That is not a proportionate reason not to vote for him, especially when by all accounts every black community leader that has actually met with Trump has nothing but good things to say about him.

    (Original post by WBZ144)
    Not just the liberals were disgusted by it, many conservatives were outraged as well. Decent people would be disgusted by a man saying that he just grabs women by the genitals and "doesn't even wait". The part in inverted comas is important, that is the part that implies lack of consent. No one cares about immature bragging of sexual conquests, but do not compare the two. Then there is the fact that he admitted to creepily going into the dressing rooms during beauty pageants when the girls were dressing, and that his status allowed him to do so. He has pretty much admitted to being a sexual predator, but I still wouldn't say that the accusations by those women against him were true unless they are proven to be.
    You've conveniently ignored the 'they let you do it' part. Also, the 'I don't even wait' part refers to going in for a kiss. Shock horror, a liberal quoting out of context.
    You're also missing the point. You don't have to agree with every aspect of a person's character, history and policies to vote for them. You can think 'Trump is a misogynist, but on balance he's better than Clinton.'
    You seem unable to grasp why voters would vote for Trump still, yet you seemingly have no issue with voters backing Clinton. Should we have a look at her scandals? She kept classified intelligence on a secret private e-mail server, covered it up and lied to Congress about it. Her husband has numerous allegations of sexual assault against him. There's the whitewater scandal and the travel gate scandal. China attempted to influence Bill Clinton's re-election in 1996, funny how Democrats forget about that when they complain that Russia leaked their emails. She awarded aid funds to Haiti to companies that just so happened to have made large donations to her foundation. She received large sums of campaign financing from Islamist states that oppress women while pretending to be a feminist champion.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    That wasn't my implication at all- this is a strawman fallacy you've invented. Your original claim centred specifically on the 8% of Black Americans that did vote for Trump. My response focused again on Black conservatives, and why they, small voter base or not, did not desert the Republican party.
    Yes, Obama was the first African-American president, which directly contradicts your notion of racism. The same electorate that voted for a black guy to be president is now suddenly racist because they don't like Clinton? Yeah, okay.
    Where exactly did I suggest that they were racist for not voting for Clinton? However, the fact remains that the first African American presidential candidate who is also a Democrat is going to attract a large percentage of the Black vote. Clinton simply doesn't have the same appeal. Not to mention the fact that many African Americans simply did not turn up to vote last year, so it's not to say that those who weren't voting for her were likely to be voting for Trump.

    Trump gained 2 million more votes than Mitt Romney did in 2012, so wrong again. The electoral college being what it is, Trump made no attempt to campaign in California and New York, two liberal strongholds the account for more than the entirety of Clinton's popular vote lead, but he did flip numerous blue states.
    You can try and spin it however you want, but the fact remains that there was shift towards Trump this election from the Democrats.
    The first part is correct; he turned out to have more than Romney after all of the votes were counted as opposed to when the results were first announced. However, I don't buy the claim that Trump didn't win the popular vote because he didn't campaign in Democrat strongholds. Clinton supporters claim that she could have won the electoral college if she had campaigned in crucial states; it's not as though Trump won by a landslide in the swing states, after all. Such speculations are meaningless without proof.

    Gloria Allred is pursuing one claim, what of the others?
    That's not my standard of proof- I'm pointing out liberal hypocrisy. Regardless, Trump could well be any and all of those things. The whole point is that it doesn't negate why people vote for him. What Liberals continue to fail to understand is that not everyone is a whiny melodramatic drama queen. Black conservatives want jobs and immigration reform. That's why Trump appealed to them. They don't care if he got sued by the DOJ over his company's letting practices forty years ago. That is not a proportionate reason not to vote for him, especially when by all accounts every black community leader that has actually met with Trump has nothing but good things to say about him.
    Do you have a source for the last sentence?

    Trump's comments on women are not the reasons I cited for why I was puzzled at the minority of Blacks who supported Trump and I did mention that those Black voters were probably anti-immigration. But as a Black woman, I would have more self-respect than to support someone who flirts with the alt-right and by the looks of it, will set racial tensions to an all-time high. And I don't need to be a Clinton supporter to oppose such a man. It's funny how his supporters always try to deflect attention from Trump to the Clintons whenever he is criticised it's because they cannot properly defend him.

    You've conveniently ignored the 'they let you do it' part. Also, the 'I don't even wait' part refers to going in for a kiss. Shock horror, a liberal quoting out of context.
    You're also missing the point. You don't have to agree with every aspect of a person's character, history and policies to vote for them. You can think 'Trump is a misogynist, but on balance he's better than Clinton.'
    You seem unable to grasp why voters would vote for Trump still, yet you seemingly have no issue with voters backing Clinton. Should we have a look at her scandals? She kept classified intelligence on a secret private e-mail server, covered it up and lied to Congress about it. Her husband has numerous allegations of sexual assault against him. There's the whitewater scandal and the travel gate scandal. China attempted to influence Bill Clinton's re-election in 1996, funny how Democrats forget about that when they complain that Russia leaked their emails. She awarded aid funds to Haiti to companies that just so happened to have made large donations to her foundation. She received large sums of campaign financing from Islamist states that oppress women while pretending to be a feminist champion.
    Yes, he uses his celebrity status to get away with sexually assaulting women. The "they let you do it when you're a star" part actually does nothing to help his case. And last time I checked, kissing women without their consent is still sexual assault.

    Again with the whataboutery concerning Clintons because you can't adequately defend Trump. If you want to believe that Bill Clinton is a rapist by applying your own standard of proof then fine. But if you don't apply that same standard to Trump then you are a hypocrite. I don't care about Bill Clinton and how he is perceived. I am, however, against Trump supporters trivialising the way he boasted about sexual assault as "locker room talk". Men who are known for their objectification of women have come out and said that it was not normal. This thread is about Black voters and Trump, not all voters and Clinton. Who is shifting the goalposts now?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I won't be talked down to by a racist, far-left black activist still on the Democratic plantation, thank you very much.
    • Offline

      17
      (Original post by Cato the Elder)
      I won't be talked down to by a racist, far-left black activist still on the Democratic plantation, thank you very much.
      Have you ever been called a hotep/coon/Uncle Tom for your views before? :holmes:
      Offline

      3
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by StrawbAri)
      Have you ever been called a hotep/coon/Uncle Tom for your views before? :holmes:
      Nope, and I wouldn't care if I was. People who use such terms are feeble-minded, xenophobic morons.
      Offline

      3
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by WBZ144)
      That's a very tasteless thing to say and petty name calling gets us nowhere, however I do wonder what was going through the minds of the 8% of Blacks Trump supporters (much less than that when you count the Blacks who didn't vote). Surely they are not all like Ben Carson and Allen West, who are obviously full of self-hatred and allow themselves to be used for racist agendas. Did they think it would be funny? Or perhaps they were so strongly opposed to immigration, they were willing to overlook the questionable attitudes of Trump, his campaigners and a sizeable number of his supporters towards African Americans.
      Probably former blue collars who thought that Trump would bring their factory back from Mexico, and who remembered that Bill Clinton said "NAFTA means jobs".
      Offline

      16
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by WBZ144)
      Where exactly did I suggest that they were racist for not voting for Clinton? However, the fact remains that the first African American presidential candidate who is also a Democrat is going to attract a large percentage of the Black vote. Clinton simply doesn't have the same appeal. Not to mention the fact that many African Americans simply did not turn up to vote last year, so it's not to say that those who weren't voting for her were likely to be voting for Trump.

      'That's a very tasteless thing to say and petty name calling gets us nowhere, however I do wonder what was going through the minds of the 8% of Blacks Trump supporters (much less than that when you count the Blacks who didn't vote). Surely they are not all like Ben Carson and Allen West, who are obviously full of self-hatred and allow themselves to be used for racist agendas. Did they think it would be funny? Or perhaps they were so strongly opposed to immigration, they were willing to overlook the questionable attitudes of Trump, his campaigners and a sizeable number of his supporters towards African Americans.'

      The clear inference in your quote is that the only attraction to voting for Trump is if one holds racist views or supports a racist agenda.

      Obama attracted a relatively large percentage of white vote for a Democrat candidate, which precisely proves my point that the electorate is not racist.

      Again, you're arguing a point I didn't make. Infact neither of have have made that point. Your original point was regarding Black conservatives that voted for Trump. The fact that you keep pointing out reasons why Clinton turns voters off proves my point- My argument is precisely that negative criticisms of Trump are not in themselves a reason not to vote for him in the context of the election. You seem incredulous that any Black American would vote for Trump yet in a contradiction you seem to accept that Clinton does not inherently appeal to Black voters.

      (Original post by WBZ144)
      The first part is correct; he turned out to have more than Romney after all of the votes were counted as opposed to when the results were first announced. However, I don't buy the claim that Trump didn't win the popular vote because he didn't campaign in Democrat strongholds. Clinton supporters claim that she could have won the electoral college if she had campaigned in crucial states; it's not as though Trump won by a landslide in the swing states, after all. Such speculations are meaningless without proof.
      He had more votes than Romney did in 2012 when on election night. You're simply grasping at straws.

      I never said Trump definitely would have won the popular vote had he campaigned in California and New York. However there's no denying he made no effort to because he didn't have to, where as Clinton was content in running up the scores in those two states while making no effort in the states that actually mattered to the election. That proves incompetence on her part and nothing else.

      (Original post by WBZ144)
      Do you have a source for the last sentence?
      Trump has met with the likes of Martin Luther King III, Steve Harvey, Kanye West, Jim Brown and Ray Lewis. Despite numerous attempts from the main stream media to bait them into doing so, not one had a single criticism of Trump. And of course straight away the liberal media denounced them and attacked them all, while at the same time hypocritically pretending to ponder why there weren't more black members of Trump's cabinet.

      (Original post by WBZ144)
      Trump's comments on women are not the reasons I cited for why I was puzzled at the minority of Blacks who supported Trump and I did mention that those Black voters were probably anti-immigration.
      You didn't mention it, you mocked them for it. You explicitly stated that being anti-immigration isn't itself a reason to vote for Trump.

      (Original post by WBZ144)
      But as a Black woman, I would have more self-respect than to support someone who flirts with the alt-right and by the looks of it, will set racial tensions to an all-time high. And I don't need to be a Clinton supporter to oppose such a man. It's funny how his supporters always try to deflect attention from Trump to the Clintons whenever he is criticised it's because they cannot properly defend him.
      It's hard to imagine racial tensions in America getting any higher than BLM activists chanting in the streets that cops are pigs and they should be wrapped in bacon and fried, or the numerous black attacks on Trump voters in the aftermath of the election.
      Trump voters are more than ready to defend his policies but the problem is you're not wiling to argue against his policies, instead engaging in numerous logical fallacies and attacking Trump himself.
      You can oppose Trump but that doesn't change the fact that someone had to be voted for at the election. You've given no reason as to why anyone should have voted for any of the other candidates, nor why conservatives should have abandoned the Republicans.

      (Original post by WBZ144)
      Yes, he uses his celebrity status to get away with sexually assaulting women. The "they let you do it when you're a star" part actually does nothing to help his case. And last time I checked, kissing women without their consent is still sexual assault.
      You don't know the context of the situations he described, but then again Liberals never do bother with the actual context. Of course the most likely situation is that he was grandstanding for the interview. As both men and women do.
      And like I said, most sexual assault allegations have conveniently disappeared or have been withdrawn since the election result. Without anything conclusive, of course most conservatives aren't going to abandon Trump simply because Liberals can whinge and whine and be really annoying and melodramatic over the 'scandal'.

      (Original post by WBZ144)
      Again with the whataboutery concerning Clintons because you can't adequately defend Trump. If you want to believe that Bill Clinton is a rapist by applying your own standard of proof then fine. But if you don't apply that same standard to Trump then you are a hypocrite. I don't care about Bill Clinton and how he is perceived. I am, however, against Trump supporters trivialising the way he boasted about sexual assault as "locker room talk". Men who are known for their objectification of women have come out and said that it was not normal. This thread is about Black voters and Trump, not all voters and Clinton. Who is shifting the goalposts now?
      You may want to go and re-read your original post. I've perfectly explained exactly why voters have not been inclined to desert Donald Trump in spite of his scandals and negative character aspects. A lot of it has to do with precisely the fact that Clinton has even worse scandals and character aspects. That's not whataboutery; for you to try and apply that term here shows you don't have a clue what you're talking about. The Presidential Election is a two-horse race; one candidate's performance directly effects the other.
      So you say that people shouldn't vote for Trump because he has allegations of sexual assault and racist business practices against him, yet you fail to comprehend the fact that the alternative is Hilary Clinton. I've listed the scandals against her, which are more serious in nature.
      So my original points stands- A Black Conservative is not going to switch to another side simply because Trump is a misogynist and faced a DOJ lawsuit forty years ago, because Trump is actually campaigning on issues they care about and the alternatives to him are much worse. It's really not that hard of a situation to comprehend.
      Offline

      19
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by pol pot noodles)
      'That's a very tasteless thing to say and petty name calling gets us nowhere, however I do wonder what was going through the minds of the 8% of Blacks Trump supporters (much less than that when you count the Blacks who didn't vote). Surely they are not all like Ben Carson and Allen West, who are obviously full of self-hatred and allow themselves to be used for racist agendas. Did they think it would be funny? Or perhaps they were so strongly opposed to immigration, they were willing to overlook the questionable attitudes of Trump, his campaigners and a sizeable number of his supporters towards African Americans.'

      The clear inference in your quote is that the only attraction to voting for Trump is if one holds racist views or supports a racist agenda.

      Obama attracted a relatively large percentage of white vote for a Democrat candidate, which precisely proves my point that the electorate is not racist.

      Again, you're arguing a point I didn't make. Infact neither of have have made that point. Your original point was regarding Black conservatives that voted for Trump. The fact that you keep pointing out reasons why Clinton turns voters off proves my point- My argument is precisely that negative criticisms of Trump are not in themselves a reason not to vote for him in the context of the election. You seem incredulous that any Black American would vote for Trump yet in a contradiction you seem to accept that Clinton does not inherently appeal to Black voters.
      I repeat again (not sure how many times this needs repeating): Obama attracting a sizable percentage of the White vote is irrelevant to the question of what Black voters could find appealing about Trump. It was you who went off point by resorting to whataboutery in the first place, and attempted to deflect attention from Trump to the Clintons. His character is highly relevant to whether or not he should be supported as a candidate for the presidency. If someone had clear contempt for me, why on Earth would I want to put this person in a position of power over me? The last sentence is ludicrous, considering that it's very possible to despise Trump while not supporting Clinton either.

      The bolded part would be true if you agree that being anti-immigration is the same as having a racist agenda. The Black voters who are anti-immigration have every right to hold that view, but it must have been extreme to the point that they are willing to overlook the fact that Trump had a number of campaigners (some who are now in his cabinet) who have contempt for them. In addition to this, they are willing to overlook the proven anti-Black views among half of his supporters.

      Trump has met with the likes of Martin Luther King III, Steve Harvey, Kanye West, Jim Brown and Ray Lewis. Despite numerous attempts from the main stream media to bait them into doing so, not one had a single criticism of Trump. And of course straight away the liberal media denounced them and attacked them all, while at the same time hypocritically pretending to ponder why there weren't more black members of Trump's cabinet.
      You said that he had met with every Black community leader and that they all had nothing but positive things to say about him, can you prove this? I didn't ask about the "liberal media", so don't go off on a tangent.

      You didn't mention it, you mocked them for it. You explicitly stated that being anti-immigration isn't itself a reason to vote for Trump.
      Mocked them? You must be thin-skinned. I said that said that they were willing to overlook the anti-Black sentiment among many of Trump supporters and his campaigners. Like I said: I would have enough self-respect not to put such people in a position of power over me when they have a racial bias that could only affect me negatively.

      It's hard to imagine racial tensions in America getting any higher than BLM activists chanting in the streets that cops are pigs and they should be wrapped in bacon and fried, or the numerous black attacks on Trump voters in the aftermath of the election.
      There are various sources which show that hate-crime increased after Trump, by dozens in certain places.

      Trump voters are more than ready to defend his policies but the problem is you're not wiling to argue against his policies, instead engaging in numerous logical fallacies and attacking Trump himself.
      You can oppose Trump but that doesn't change the fact that someone had to be voted for at the election. You've given no reason as to why anyone should have voted for any of the other candidates, nor why conservatives should have abandoned the Republicans.
      This thread is about Trump, that is why he is being criticised. Why should other candidates be mentioned? For the sake of equal opportunity?

      It was also about Black voters specifically. And I have mentioned the reason why I do not understand Black voters who supported Trump as a candidate specifically.


      And like I said, most sexual assault allegations have conveniently disappeared or have been withdrawn since the election result. Without anything conclusive, of course most conservatives aren't going to abandon Trump simply because Liberals can whinge and whine and be really annoying and melodramatic over the 'scandal'.
      The allegations would only be considered withdrawn if the alleged victims said that it was all made up and wanted to withdraw it. They have not. And I don't find being disgusted over boasting about sexual assault to be "melodramatic" but since you do, it says a lot about your mindset. Trump supporters seem to whine a lot more about Liberals criticising him, something that we have every right to do.

      You may want to go and re-read your original post. I've perfectly explained exactly why voters have not been inclined to desert Donald Trump in spite of his scandals and negative character aspects. A lot of it has to do with precisely the fact that Clinton has even worse scandals and character aspects. That's not whataboutery; for you to try and apply that term here shows you don't have a clue what you're talking about. The Presidential Election is a two-horse race; one candidate's performance directly effects the other.
      So you say that people shouldn't vote for Trump because he has allegations of sexual assault and racist business practices against him, yet you fail to comprehend the fact that the alternative is Hilary Clinton. I've listed the scandals against her, which are more serious in nature.
      So my original points stands- A Black Conservative is not going to switch to another side simply because Trump is a misogynist and faced a DOJ lawsuit forty years ago, because Trump is actually campaigning on issues they care about and the alternatives to him are much worse. It's really not that hard of a situation to comprehend.
      Like I said: its perfectly possible to like neither of them. Although I dislike Trump a lot more and believe that his character is much worse, I don't like Clinton at all. If I said that Black Conservatives should have voted for her instead then you would have had a point. As I did not say this, you do not, and it is whataboutery. There were third parties and many who had previously voted did not turn up to the polling station.
      Offline

      16
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by WBZ144)
      I repeat again (not sure how many times this needs repeating): Obama attracting a sizable percentage of the White vote is irrelevant to the question of what Black voters could find appealing about Trump.
      I never said it was relevant to that. I mentioned in passing that it contradicts Liberal claims that America is racist for voting for Trump.

      (Original post by WBZ144)
      It was you who went off point by resorting to whataboutery in the first place, and attempted to deflect attention from Trump to the Clintons. His character is highly relevant to whether or not he should be supported as a candidate for the presidency. If someone had clear contempt for me, why on Earth would I want to put this person in a position of power over me? The last sentence is ludicrous, considering that it's very possible to despise Trump while not supporting Clinton either.
      Again, whataboutery is applicable here. The performance of one candidate in the Presidential Election directly affects the result of the other. You claim black conservatives shouldn't have voted for Trump, yet recognise that they have little reason to support Clinton. Not voting for Trump would directly help Clinton become President. Do you not understand the concept of tactical voting?
      When has Trump shown clear contempt for black conservatives? And no, the settled DOJ lawsuit is not proof.

      (Original post by WBZ144)
      The bolded part would be true if you agree that being anti-immigration is the same as having a racist agenda. The Black voters who are anti-immigration have every right to hold that view, but it must have been extreme to the point that they are willing to overlook the fact that Trump had a number of campaigners (some who are now in his cabinet) who have contempt for them. In addition to this, they are willing to overlook the proven anti-Black views among half of his supporters.
      So just to clarify, you don't think that an anti-(illegal)immigration view point is racist?

      Why would the views of some of Trump's supporters come into the equation? Rationally and logically, that has no bearing on whether or not a black conservative should vote for Trump. Trump is taking the presidency, not his voters.
      Again, you have no sense of proportion or priorities. In the exact same way that the long list of negatives about Clinton did not put off Liberals from voting for her, these points you mention would not put of black conservatives from voting for Trump. Because the alternative for both of them is something even worse.

      (Original post by WBZ144)
      You said that he had met with every Black community leader and that they all had nothing but positive things to say about him, can you prove this? I didn't ask about the "liberal media", so don't go off on a tangent.
      No I didn't.
      What I said was:
      by all accounts every black community leader that has actually met with Trump has nothing but good things to say about him.

      That is quite distinctly different from what you claim I said. Why would you flat out lie like that?
      The statement is factually correct; every black community leader that has met with Trump has only said good things about him and refuse to criticise him, even under heavy baiting from the Liberal media.

      I can go off on any 'tangent' I want (lord knows you have), especially when it's relevant to the context of our discussion.

      (Original post by WBZ144)
      Mocked them? You must be thin-skinned. I said that said that they were willing to overlook the anti-Black sentiment among many of Trump supporters and his campaigners. Like I said: I would have enough self-respect not to put such people in a position of power over me when they have a racial bias that could only affect me negatively.
      Thin-skinned? For pointing out that you were mocking? Hm, okay. You said that black members of Trump's cabinet are self-hating and allowing themselves to be used. You implied the only reasonable explanation for such behaviour was as a joke. Your entire post was patronising and condescending, so yes, mocking.
      And like I said: Maybe conservative black people didn't think overblown melodramatic non-issues hyped up by liberals were enough for them to not vote for a conservative president.
      On one hand he's going to sort out illegal-immigration and bring back jobs to America, strengthen the military and ensure a conservative Supreme Court.
      But on the other hand he's also a misogynist and says mean things sometimes. Also some of his cabinet are probably racists.
      It's not hard to see that on balance they're still going to vote for Trump.

      Doesn't in anyway shape or form contradict what I said. Also, over half of the hate crimes reported in Michigan took place in schools and colleges. Proclaiming you voted for Trump is in itself enough to trigger delicate liberal students and get you charged with a hate crime on a college campus.

      Did you also know that not one single high profile supposed pro-Trump hate crime that made headline news turned out to be true?
      http://www.fakehatecrimes.org

      We do however have numerous verified attacks against Trump supporters, often with video evidence. You only have to look at what happened in Chicago.

      (Original post by WBZ144)
      This thread is about Trump, that is why he is being criticised. Why should other candidates be mentioned? For the sake of equal opportunity?
      Your post was about voting for Trump. I've already explained how it's relevant. You can't simply ignore it because it doesn't fit your blinkered narrative.

      (Original post by WBZ144)
      The allegations would only be considered withdrawn if the alleged victims said that it was all made up and wanted to withdraw it. They have not. And I don't find being disgusted over boasting about sexual assault to be "melodramatic" but since you do, it says a lot about your mindset. Trump supporters seem to whine a lot more about Liberals criticising him, something that we have every right to do.
      There have been specific lawsuits that have been withdrawn or conveniently disappeared.
      Yes, my mindset is that I live in the real world, not a delicate liberal bubble. I do not under any circumstances condone actual sexual assault. I simply just don't trip over myself to try and be as offended as possible over misogynistic locker room talk.
      Liberals literally started riots because they lost a presidential election, but we're the whiny ones? Yeah, sure.

      (Original post by WBZ144)
      Like I said: its perfectly possible to like neither of them. Although I dislike Trump a lot more and believe that his character is much worse, I don't like Clinton at all. If I said that Black Conservatives should have voted for her instead then you would have had a point. As I did not say this, you do not, and it is whataboutery. There were third parties and many who had previously voted did not turn up to the polling station.
      Do you not understand the concept of tactical voting? No third party was ever going to win office. It was a straight shoot out between Trump and Clinton. And my entire point was that black conservatives didn't have to personally like Trump but still should have voted for him. And a lot of it is precisely because Clinton. So yes, completely relevant.
      Offline

      19
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by pol pot noodles)
      I never said it was relevant to that. I mentioned in passing that it contradicts Liberal claims that America is racist for voting for Trump.
      But where did I say that? Why would you bring something completely irrelevant to anything I said into this conversation? Besides, even if voting for Trump = racist, and not voting for him = not racist, around a quarter of Americans who were eligible to vote voted for him. So by that simplistic logic, three quarters of America is not racist.

      Again, whataboutery is applicable here. The performance of one candidate in the Presidential Election directly affects the result of the other. You claim black conservatives shouldn't have voted for Trump, yet recognise that they have little reason to support Clinton. Not voting for Trump would directly help Clinton become President. Do you not understand the concept of tactical voting?
      When has Trump shown clear contempt for black conservatives? And no, the settled DOJ lawsuit is not proof.
      Where is the whataboutery? I was criticising Trump's character and specified reasons why I do not understand Blacks who support him (his, his cabinet's and his supporters' attitudes towards Blacks) and yoiur response was along the lines of "what about Clinton"? Do you even know what the term "whataboutery" means. You asked for reasons why Black voters should not support him and I mentioned his administration's contempt for Blacks. Your response should be to refute my points, rather than to go off on a tangent. What part of "it is possible to be anti-Trump while not supporting Clinton" do you not understand?

      So just to clarify, you don't think that an anti-(illegal)immigration view point is racist?
      Not, as long as being anti-illegal immigration is all they are and they're not one of those who hide their bigotry under the blanket of being anti-immigration.

      Why would the views of some of Trump's supporters come into the equation? Rationally and logically, that has no bearing on whether or not a black conservative should vote for Trump. Trump is taking the presidency, not his voters.
      Again, you have no sense of proportion or priorities. In the exact same way that the long list of negatives about Clinton did not put off Liberals from voting for her, these points you mention would not put of black conservatives from voting for Trump. Because the alternative for both of them is something even worse.
      His supporters do matter, because there is a reason why these people came out of the woodworks after his campaign, and the reason does not reflect to well on him.

      And Trump also has a lot of negative traits other than the ones that I have mentioned but I can understand why some Whites voted for him. I can understand why some Christians and men voted for him. His campaign was not riddled with antipathy towards these groups. His cabinet does not contain a man who thinks that 17% of White CEOs is too many. Perhaps if I didn't belong to any of the groups who his administration has a bias against, I wouldn't look as closely at his negatives.

      No I didn't.
      What I said was:
      by all accounts every black community leader that has actually met with Trump has nothing but good things to say about him.

      That is quite distinctly different from what you claim I said. Why would you flat out lie like that?
      The statement is factually correct; every black community leader that has met with Trump has only said good things about him and refuse to criticise him, even under heavy baiting from the Liberal media.
      Alright, I must have misread it while typing on my phone, my mistake. Now, do you have a source for the bolded part? I do remember him him being told off at a Black church on one occasion, so it doesn't appear that every Black leader who he has met with approves.

      Thin-skinned? For pointing out that you were mocking? Hm, okay. You said that black members of Trump's cabinet are self-hating and allowing themselves to be used. You implied the only reasonable explanation for such behaviour was as a joke. Your entire post was patronising and condescending, so yes, mocking.
      Ben Carson is in Trump's cabinet, Allen West is not. Long before either of them had anything to do with Trump, I thought that they were self-hating for allowing themselves to be used for the agenda of racists. However, they /= all of Trump's Black voters.

      I believe that Trump is a walking joke, and I'm not the only one. So I would not be surprised if there were people of any race who didn't care about the election results and voted for him because they thought that it would be funny. It's pure speculation, but if it is true, that's unsurprising.

      And like I said: Maybe conservative black people didn't think overblown melodramatic non-issues hyped up by liberals were enough for them to not vote for a conservative president.
      On one hand he's going to sort out illegal-immigration and bring back jobs to America, strengthen the military and ensure a conservative Supreme Court.
      But on the other hand he's also a misogynist and says mean things sometimes. Also some of his cabinet are probably racists.
      It's not hard to see that on balance they're still going to vote for Trump.
      It must be nice to live in such a bubble, you see putting people who have contempt for you into a position of power over you as a non-issue. The vast majority of African Americans do not seem to agree that their issues are "overblown". Now who is being condescending? And Trump has a lot more negative traits than the watered down ones that you mentioned.

      Doesn't in anyway shape or form contradict what I said. Also, over half of the hate crimes reported in Michigan took place in schools and colleges. Proclaiming you voted for Trump is in itself enough to trigger delicate liberal students and get you charged with a hate crime on a college campus.

      Did you also know that not one single high profile supposed pro-Trump hate crime that made headline news turned out to be true?
      http://www.fakehatecrimes.org
      I would like a reliable source which proves everything you said in that quote. Thousands of those crimes were reported and some had video evidence. Can you prove that they were all fake? And racial tensions come from all sides, I am not disregarding the violence towards Trump supporters as well (unlike some). But my point that racial tensions have gotten even worse and may still plummet holds true.

      Your post was about voting for Trump. I've already explained how it's relevant. You can't simply ignore it because it doesn't fit your blinkered narrative.
      Your "explanation was "why should they vote for Clinton? When I didn't even say that they should in the first place. So no, that does not answer my question.

      There have been specific lawsuits that have been withdrawn or conveniently disappeared.
      Yes, my mindset is that I live in the real world, not a delicate liberal bubble. I do not under any circumstances condone actual sexual assault. I simply just don't trip over myself to try and be as offended as possible over misogynistic locker room talk.
      Liberals literally started riots because they lost a presidential election, but we're the whiny ones? Yeah, sure.
      Incorrect: only one of those women has decided to pursue a lawsuit. The others have come out about their alleged experiences but have not chose to take legal action. And if their allegations are true, I can understand why they wouldn't.

      Trump was gearing his supporters up to riot if he lost. I specifically remember a surge in hate crimes (well documented) and fake lynchings of Obama when he won the election in 2008 too. It does not seem the conservatives are any less whiny.

      Do you not understand the concept of tactical voting? No third party was ever going to win office. It was a straight shoot out between Trump and Clinton. And my entire point was that black conservatives didn't have to personally like Trump but still should have voted for him. And a lot of it is precisely because Clinton. So yes, completely relevant.
      Like my post, that is simply speculation, as we do not have data which shows the exact reasons why they voted for Trump or even a rough outline of the main reasons. There were bound to be those who viewed it more as a vote against Clinton, sure. But how many were there, exactly? How many voted for Trump because they actually support him?
     
     
     
    Reply
    Submit reply
    TSR Support Team

    We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

    Updated: January 21, 2017
  1. See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  2. Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
    Useful resources
  3. See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  4. 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

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