Trump eviscerates Crooked Hillary

's
Thankfully, not everyone in the country cowers to false charges of racism by racialist hacks.

that was a pretty quick walk back. You're were just complaining that conservativea didn't want to support Trump. Now, all of the sudden you're saying they don't cower to false allegations of racism. As stated, Trump has a proven history of racism. From discriminating against African American's in housing, to re-tweeting white supremacist messages , to saying he doesn't want black bankers counting his money, to attacking a judge because "he's Mexican". The last of which Trump quickly cowered in the face of criticism from his own party.
 
's

that was a pretty quick walk back. You're were just complaining that conservativea didn't want to support Trump. Now, all of the sudden you're saying they don't cower to false allegations of racism. As stated, Trump has a proven history of racism. From discriminating against African American's in housing, to re-tweeting white supremacist messages , to saying he doesn't want black bankers counting his money, to attacking a judge because "he's Mexican". The last of which Trump quickly cowered in the face of criticism from his own party.

The last charge about Trump 'attacking the judge because he was Mexican' wasn't racist. That's exactly the sort of racial demagoguery I was talking about. Trump reasoned that the judge might be biased against him in court because of Trumps immigration policy.

I've never heard of the other charges but I get the idea theyre probably of equal merit.
 
The last charge about Trump 'attacking the judge because he was Mexican' wasn't racist. That's exactly the sort of racial demagoguery I was talking about. Trump reasoned that the judge might be biased against him in court because of Trumps immigration policy.

I've never heard of the other charges but I get the idea theyre probably of equal merit.

You probably feel like I'm picking on you, but I need to provide a rational counterpoint for this:

Trump's comments on the judge (who has Mexican heritage) were complete fucking bullshit.
 
For calling both candidates liars?

Great call!!!

no...when hillary makes a speech you don't have the attitude of 'oh who cares it's just liar vs. liar as usual"

when trump makes a speech all of a sudden that's when they are both liars.
 
As President, Trump won't be a liability to the GOP?

Great call!!!

you are looking at it from the perspective of trump right now. If trump wins, then that means his popularity would have gone up and his support would have gone up. If he wins, his 'liability' is naturally correlated to go down.
 
You probably feel like I'm picking on you, but I need to provide a rational counterpoint for this:

Trump's comments on the judge (who has Mexican heritage) were complete fucking bullshit.

But not racist. People make stupid statements that aren't racist every day.
 
Logically, the choices are a known disaster verses a crap shoot.

No brainer for me.
that's the choice..but I need to see Trump isn't a disaster in the making or it's 3rd party time. Forget the rhetoric.
I need to see lot more "presidentialism" -his ability to control his temper. We know Clinton has horrid judgement
 
The last charge about Trump 'attacking the judge because he was Mexican' wasn't racist. That's exactly the sort of racial demagoguery I was talking about. Trump reasoned that the judge might be biased against him in court because of Trumps immigration policy.

I've never heard of the other charges but I get the idea theyre probably of equal merit.

Trump reasoned that the judge couldn't do his job because , his exact words, "he's Mexican". The judge is an American. Judges hear cases all that time with litigants that may have political beliefs they do not agree with. Being of any particular ethnicity has never , in of itself, been a legitimate basis to accuse a judge of bias. As Ryan said, it's the "textbook definition of racism".
 
But not racist. People make stupid statements that aren't racist every day.

Explain how it wasn't racist. Since Trump claimed that the judge can't rule fairly (on a case not about immigration) because he's Mexican, the burden is on you to alter reality, abolish logic, and to be inventive.
 
Explain how it wasn't racist. Since Trump claimed that the judge can't rule fairly (on a case not about immigration) because he's Mexican, the burden is on you to alter reality, abolish logic, and to be inventive.

I may be wrong but I thought Trump was implying that the judge might be biased because of his many calls for a wall to be built across the border. Is that any different to lawyers choosing jurors before a case?
 
How come I'm not barred from this thread along with all the forum's other anti-fascist intelligentsia ?
 
Trump reasoned that the judge couldn't do his job because , his exact words, "he's Mexican". The judge is an American. Judges hear cases all that time with litigants that may have political beliefs they do not agree with. Being of any particular ethnicity has never , in of itself, been a legitimate basis to accuse a judge of bias. As Ryan said, it's the "textbook definition of racism".

Ryan lol.

I don't care what Ryan said. The judge had reason to be biased against Trump because of the judge's Mexican heritage and Trumps stand on immigration. NOT because Trump thinks all Mexicans are intrinsically biased. THAT would be rscist.

The former isn't racism no matter how bad you want Trump to be a racist.
 
Ryan lol.

I don't care what Ryan said. The judge had reason to be biased against Trump because of the judge's Mexican heritage and Trumps stand on immigration. NOT because Trump thinks all Mexicans are intrinsically biased. THAT would be rscist.

The former isn't racism no matter how bad you want Trump to be a racist.

There are those who believe that there is profit in racism and act accordingly. Are they racists ? Yes, you judge people by what they say and do.
 
Back
Top