• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

President Trump: How and Why?

countryboy said:
Federal judges are not infallible, in fact, some are downright incompetent. There is no valid argument for this position other than, "blacks are too stoopid to git ID". If that ain't a racist position, nothing is.
Click to expand...

Goodness, we've been through this on many, many threads and you're wrong but I don't want to rehash it here.

BTW, the position in and of itself is racist. That doesn't necessarily make YOU racist. You may simply be naive and gullible. :shrug:
Click to expand...

I'm at the point I can't tell if this is snark or serious. First the OP is about liberals crying "racist" too often, so what happens? I take a position and two right wingers....call me (or the position) a racist, for having a position on an issue! It's like someone said, "Please provide an example of right wing PROJECTION!" and this thread was the example! :roll:

Second, I don't believe I'm naive or gullible and it's fascinating that you must think red states have passed voter ID laws out of the goodness of their heart, with only election integrity in mind, and not because they know 100% that such laws give them an advantage by driving down the voting population or poor inner city, mostly minorities, who vote 80-90% democratic. THAT is practically the definition of "naive and gullible."
 
That video was...wow. Spot on. I REALLY liked that video. Definitely going to re-watch that from time to time. And everyone over at the DNC needs to watch it and memorize it.
 
I couldn't get past a minute of the original video, guy's an idiot. The loss is on Hillary.

I think a huge mistake is that she did not defend herself well from the charges Trump made about the FBI investigation, she never addressed it herself. Nor did she respond to charges against the Clinton Foundation pay for play. When you're in a dog fight with a junk yard dog, you gotta go for the throat. She never did. It made her appear guilty, or weak, or both. Huge mistake.

Neither candidate addressed the deficit, but she didn't come off as fiscally conservative. Trump didn't either, she mentioned that his tax plan was projected to significantly raise the deficit, once, but she didn't stay on it.

Last, as with her failure to go on Trump's plans raising the deficit, her other messaging was not highly relevant nor crisply delivered and hammered.

Trump is a marketing expert, and although he likely massively lied to win the election, his messaging was crisp, crystallized into easy to remember sound bites, and hammered home over and over.
 
JasperL said:
LMAO, so you're doing exactly what you allege liberals are doing. Congratulations.

Or maybe you're being sarcastic - can't tell. But my view isn't racist in the least and if you don't like the judge's opinion, that's OK, you can visit any of dozens of threads on the issue and see there is plenty of other evidence. All the judge did was call a spade a spade.
Click to expand...

I'm as serious as a heart attack, Bro. And, if you are accusing me of authoritarianism, you might want to visit that charge on your "judge" buds. I'm completely comfortable with the fact that you and I don't agree on the concept of racism, but any time ANYBODY grants preferential treatment to a group or class based on race, it's RACISM.

I know what I'm talking about, and you're opinions won't change me.
 
BrewerBob said:
That video was...wow. Spot on. I REALLY liked that video. Definitely going to re-watch that from time to time. And everyone over at the DNC needs to watch it and memorize it.
Click to expand...

They might be smart enough to watch it, but you want them to "memorize" it.................damn, Man, that's funny.
 
JasperL said:
I guess it depends on the issue. For example, it's my view that voter ID is a transparent effort to drive down the votes of blacks - not because they are black but because they vote democratic, and are poor and urban. I don't think it's racism, per se, but it has a racist effect and pointing that out is based on the merits, actually, or the merits as I evaluate them. So, sure, that allegation is made but it's no more outlandish a claim than was made by a federal judge in his opinion.

But I also agree and am frustrated that the 'left' often cries 'racism' or whatever in a lot of cases where there is just disagreement. Using voting ID from above, I recognize that there is or can be honest differences of opinion. If you support them, I fully accept you do so because you believe it's the right thing to do without regard to even partisanship. I disagree, don't think it's the right policy, and am certain red states are pushing it because they know 100% it gives them an advantage in elections. But we should be able to argue without me calling you a racist, and which I don't ever do. I agree too many times leftists make that claim when they should be arguing on the evidence or the policy.



OK, basically I agree with the gist of that guy's comments, and your last statement. There is a lot of truth to both.
Click to expand...

isn't it racist to assume that poor black voters who overwhelmingly vote Democrat are too stupid or competent to get an ID. If people have to be subjected to a background check and sign an affidavit after producing an ID to purchase a firearm, they certainly should be able to produce an ID to vote
 
finebead said:
I couldn't get past a minute of the original video, guy's an idiot. The loss is on Hillary.

I think a huge mistake is that she did not defend herself well from the charges Trump made about the FBI investigation, she never addressed it herself. Nor did she respond to charges against the Clinton Foundation pay for play. When you're in a dog fight with a junk yard dog, you gotta go for the throat. She never did. It made her appear guilty, or weak, or both. Huge mistake.

Neither candidate addressed the deficit, but she didn't come off as fiscally conservative. Trump didn't either, she mentioned that his tax plan was projected to significantly raise the deficit, once, but she didn't stay on it.

Last, as with her failure to go on Trump's plans raising the deficit, her other messaging was not highly relevant nor crisply delivered and hammered.

Trump is a marketing expert, and although he likely massively lied to win the election, his messaging was crisp, crystallized into easy to remember sound bites, and hammered home over and over.
Click to expand...

She didn't have a message. Like Rex Reeves used to say on The Gong Show, "Having no talent is no longer enough."
 
TurtleDude said:
JasperL said:
I guess it depends on the issue.
[...]
Click to expand...
isn't it racist to assume that poor black voters who overwhelmingly vote Democrat are too stupid or competent to get an ID. If people have to be subjected to a background check and sign an affidavit after producing an ID to purchase a firearm, they certainly should be able to produce an ID to vote
Click to expand...

​
 
Quazimodo said:
I'm as serious as a heart attack, Bro. And, if you are accusing me of authoritarianism, you might want to visit that charge on your "judge" buds. I'm completely comfortable with the fact that you and I don't agree on the concept of racism, but any time ANYBODY grants preferential treatment to a group or class based on race, it's RACISM.
Click to expand...

If I wanted to call YOU an authoritarian, I'd have done it explicitly but I didn't. What I pointed out is there is an authoritarian element on the right wing, which is completely obvious - see TRUMP.

And, no, preferential treatment isn't "racism" or "misogyny" or whatever, and that's a red herring in any event. When did I argue for 'preferential treatment' on this thread?

I know what I'm talking about, and you're opinions won't change me.
Click to expand...

And I know what I'm talking about, in my opinion! Same as you.... :roll:
 
TurtleDude said:
isn't it racist to assume that poor black voters who overwhelmingly vote Democrat are too stupid or competent to get an ID. If people have to be subjected to a background check and sign an affidavit after producing an ID to purchase a firearm, they certainly should be able to produce an ID to vote
Click to expand...

If you can find anyone taking that position who isn't a right winger, let me know. That's not my argument, and I've debated voter ID on a few dozen threads by now. I've pointed out many times why that's a BS strawman you guys make up to divert the debate.

And voting and firearms are different issues. Furthermore, the argument isn't "ID" or not, it's the type of ID which has been beat to death on those dozens of threads.
 
Glowpun said:
What irony?
Click to expand...

The irony is that he is treating fellow liberals in this rant the same way he says that liberals treat everyone who isn't liberal.
 
Other than the bit about the Green party getting more votes than Libertarians, I stand by this.

I mean, it isn't Monday morning quarterbacking to point out that large contingents of their base staging a walkout at the DNC was a harbinger.

I think a lot of Democrats were as reluctant to admit they weren't going to vote for Hillary (or at all) for the same reason there were a lot of people who didn't want to speak openly about supporting Trump.

jmotivator said:
I think you underestimate how much of this is about hatred of Hillary, not just love of Bernie. The fact that the DNC worked behind the scenes to kill Bernie's chances just flared up an already well established distrust of the DNC by Bernie's supporters. Nothing that was exhumed from that email dump would be news to the Bernie supporters, they've been watching it for months.

This wasn't a normal primary, and many of the anti-Hillary Democrats feel that they just got curb stomped by their party bosses. That isn't an easily glossed over fact given that most of the Bernie people are still looking for that hope and change that the Democrats have been selling for nearly a decade.

The Democrats took the White House in 2008 and held it in 2012 on the idea that American is broken and controlled by Wall Street and are now pushing an "America is great!" narrative and just held a coronation for one the biggest Wall Street candidates in Washington, throwing out their base in the process. Sanders was the face of that movement, but he wasn't THE movement, as shown by the walk out today.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Green Party gets more votes in November than the Libertarians.

If there is one advantage that Trump has over Hillary in November it is that his candidacy is the result of an effective insurgency in the RNC while the Democrats effectively destroyed the DNC insurgency. That isn't really good optics for the Democrats in an election cycle that is actually focused on change of politics as usual in both major parties.
Click to expand...
 
JasperL said:
Don't care what Ami says about how "liberals" really view anyone. Don't know or care who she is or her opinion about anything really.
Click to expand...

Why am I not surprised by your reaction?
 
jaeger19 said:
no offense.. but its kind of hard to put blame "on the left".. when trump himself was a birther.. questioning whether Obama was even born in this country..
Click to expand...

Exactly what is "racist" about that?

Answer: Not a damned thing.

Right wingers yelling about muslims.. sharia law, welfare queens, everyone from mexico being a rapist, murder, or drug dealer.. etc.
Click to expand...

Wow... Just wow.

You are a walking, talking, living, breathing example of either a gullible fool who allowed blogs and liberal websites to form your opinions, or you are one of those dishonest people who writes for those blogs and liberal websites that churns out that dishonest propaganda you now use to make your point.

Which is it?

"Right wingers" like myself are concerned about:

a) Radical Muslims (aka terrorists out to do us harm)... not Muslims in general.
b) Sharia law, only by those here in the US who abide by it, or advocate for its implementation. It's barbaric... plain and simple.
c) Illegal Aliens who have no right to be here (some of which are dangerous criminals), and should not be allowed to get here in the first place... We do not believe, nor have we ever even insinuated that "Mexicans" are rapist, murder, and drug dealer. You are talking about what Trump misspoke about, not what conservatives believe in, or have believed in the last 8 years during the Obama Administration.

As for you "welfare queen" comment, I have no idea wft you are talking about.

Care to make up some more phony **** to justify the left branding people racists and bigots over the last 8 years?

Its hard to argue that the labels of hate are wrong..
Click to expand...

It isn't hard at all to argue if you have a clear understanding of what conservatives actually believe... Of course when a person believes in the lies and propaganda they're being fed about the right, they're arguments have no legitimacy in the first place.

when the right wing is spouting labels of hate over and over and the rest of the republican party tolerates it.
Click to expand...

Lay off the kool-aid every once in awhile and you might discover that it's those on the left who've led the pack for decades when it comes to spouting hate. The last 3 days alone are a prime example.

And I am a conservative republican.
Click to expand...

You are a disgrace if you believe the crap you just wrote.

Oh, btw... I am writing this from place here in Puerto Penaco Mexico.

.
 
JasperL said:
I guess it depends on the issue. For example, it's my view that voter ID is a transparent effort to drive down the votes of blacks - not because they are black but because they vote democratic, and are poor and urban. I don't think it's racism, per se, but it has a racist effect and pointing that out is based on the merits, actually, or the merits as I evaluate them. So, sure, that allegation is made but it's no more outlandish a claim than was made by a federal judge in his opinion.
Click to expand...

Supporting voter IDs is not racist PERIOD!

It's about making sure that a person has the legal right to vote in a US election and making sure they are not attempting to vote on behalf of anyone else but themselves.


But I also agree and am frustrated that the 'left' often cries 'racism' or whatever in a lot of cases where there is just disagreement. Using voting ID from above, I recognize that there is or can be honest differences of opinion. If you support them, I fully accept you do so because you believe it's the right thing to do without regard to even partisanship. I disagree, don't think it's the right policy, and am certain red states are pushing it because they know 100% it gives them an advantage in elections. But we should be able to argue without me calling you a racist, and which I don't ever do. I agree too many times leftists make that claim when they should be arguing on the evidence or the policy.
Click to expand...

I disagree... Politicians always try and find angles to gain a political advantage, as was done in the North Carolina Voter ID law... but the people, including conservatives like myself, support the law for exactly the reasons I stated above.


OK, basically I agree with the gist of that guy's comments, and your last statement. There is a lot of truth to both.
Click to expand...

Thank you... I wasn't trying to be a dick, just calling them as I've seen them since Obama first took office.


.
 
JasperL said:
Don't know or care who she is or her opinion about anything really.
Click to expand...

Showing clearly you did not review the video.
1. Ami is not a girl.
2. The video is not about his opinion. It is about what the liberals interviewed said as well as a comparison between that and what the Black people interview know.
 
Here’s my theory: Tuesday’s surprise had less to do with dueling facts than rival definitions. I suspect that many Americans—an electoral college victory’s worth, at least—would agree that we shouldn’t elect a racist to the presidency. By that logic, Trump should have been defeated easily; he failed a basic moral test. But if racist is to be a decisive and disqualifying label then we need to have consensus on its meaning—my understanding of what it is to be a racist must be the same as everybody else’s. What happened Tuesday tells me that it’s not.
Click to expand...
The people who look at Trump and don’t see a racist.

BINGO...we are not a common people anymore because the social glue was allowed to evaporate because of the very few who ever understood its importance none were ever able to staunch the bleeding of the collective. We dont agree on definitions. We dont agree on facts. We dont agree on anything.

Which means we cant work together.

Civilization Crashes.
 
Quazimodo said:
Why am I not surprised by your reaction?
Click to expand...

OK, I watched the first few minutes. First, he goes to what looks like Stanford to ask "liberals" what they think. So, I guess college age students at one of the most elite schools in the country, who he decided to put on camera in the final cut because they represented whatever premise he was trying to prove, represent all "liberals." Nice to know.

In the next part he asks a handful of blacks if they have ID. Of course they ALL say they do! So what we're left with assuming is inner city blacks already HAVE "ID" so these laws don't have any effect really, everyone can already present "ID" at the polls. Well, I don't know how many people this guy interviewed, but the EVIDENCE is about 25% of black registered voters in the cities (i.e. don't drive and have a DL) do NOT have one of the IDs allowed by GOPers in the strict ID states. In Texas, about 600k-800k registered voters didn't have an acceptable ID, 200k registered voters in NC, millions nationwide. Maybe it's just bad luck he found none of those REGISTERED VOTERS without an acceptable voting ID, or he's a hack and left them out of the final cut.

In another part, he asks "Can you get ID?" Everyone says sure, these people who already have the right ID know where to get an ID. Well in Texas, something like a third of all counties didn't have any place to get an acceptable ID, so it's a bit unclear how someone without a car and no DL gets a county over to get an ID. For poor people it's also significant that a woman needs a BC and her marriage license if applicable, and those cost money, just to get an ID they don't need in their daily life but now need to vote. Poll taxes, struck down obviously, were only about $20 in today's money, but the docs required to get ID if you don't have them can easily cost 2 or 3 times that.

I quit there. It was as I expected and why I didn't watch last night. All the video did was confirm to right wingers that right wingers are correct of course, while making a determined effort to ignore the actual issues or misrepresent them. I'm guessing this ran on Fox News....
 
Excon said:
Showing clearly you did not review the video.
1. Ami is not a girl.
2. The video is not about his opinion. It is about what the liberals interviewed said as well as a comparison between that and what the Black people interview know.
Click to expand...

I know that now. I watched it, and you can read my response to someone else if you want. As I suspected, it was hackery from the get go.

BTW, surely you get that these "man on the street" things are the easiest possible format to manipulate, right? Interview any 100 people, you'll find some real idiots, probably a half dozen or more broad opinions on a subject, some intelligent, some directly opposing. Doesn't matter. You can edit it down to 3 or 4 people, and then use only the part those three or 4 said that you like, to make really ANY point you want! So this format is worthless except as propaganda, in the purest sense of the word.
 
JasperL said:
OK, I watched the first few minutes. First, he goes to what looks like Stanford to ask "liberals" what they think. So, I guess college age students at one of the most elite schools in the country, who he decided to put on camera in the final cut because they represented whatever premise he was trying to prove, represent all "liberals." Nice to know.

In the next part he asks a handful of blacks if they have ID. Of course they ALL say they do! So what we're left with assuming is inner city blacks already HAVE "ID" so these laws don't have any effect really, everyone can already present "ID" at the polls. Well, I don't know how many people this guy interviewed, but the EVIDENCE is about 25% of black registered voters in the cities (i.e. don't drive and have a DL) do NOT have one of the IDs allowed by GOPers in the strict ID states. In Texas, about 600k-800k registered voters didn't have an acceptable ID, 200k registered voters in NC, millions nationwide. Maybe it's just bad luck he found none of those REGISTERED VOTERS without an acceptable voting ID, or he's a hack and left them out of the final cut.

In another part, he asks "Can you get ID?" Everyone says sure, these people who already have the right ID know where to get an ID. Well in Texas, something like a third of all counties didn't have any place to get an acceptable ID, so it's a bit unclear how someone without a car and no DL gets a county over to get an ID. For poor people it's also significant that a woman needs a BC and her marriage license if applicable, and those cost money, just to get an ID they don't need in their daily life but now need to vote. Poll taxes, struck down obviously, were only about $20 in today's money, but the docs required to get ID if you don't have them can easily cost 2 or 3 times that.

I quit there. It was as I expected and why I didn't watch last night. All the video did was confirm to right wingers that right wingers are correct of course, while making a determined effort to ignore the actual issues or misrepresent them. I'm guessing this ran on Fox News....
Click to expand...

So, where do you go next? Let's say that each state sends out Photo Id Vans staffed with photographers and identification specialists. The service will be free. The poor, forgotten and downtrodden living in the shadows of the valleys of hell call in and request a picture ID so they can be a responsible, enfranchised, voting members of this great nation of ours. You're going to tell me that they can't afford phones, right.

Nobody in this country lives beyond telephone or cellphone coverage. If they have access to a phone, they have access to a photo ID. Your schtick is laughable. Please stop. Instead of running away from the problem, embrace it. Blacks, as you seem to think, are NOT ignorant cave dwellers incapable of communicating with the outside world.

People like you represent the pathetically racist little college students in the YouTube presentation. Blacks want to be a part of this country and they are capable and proud enough to accomplish their goals without having to rely on alibi artists like you.
 
Last edited:
JasperL said:
I know that now.
Click to expand...
Yes, after you were told, your lack of knowledge concerning that clearly indicated that you had not watched it.


JasperL said:
I watched it, and you can read my response to someone else if you want.
Click to expand...
Doh!
Why would I do that?


JasperL said:
As I suspected, it was hackery from the get go.
Click to expand...
People stating their opinions vs those who state what they know, is not hackery.


JasperL said:
BTW, surely you get that these "man on the street" things are the easiest possible format to manipulate, right? Interview any 100 people, you'll find some real idiots, probably a half dozen or more broad opinions on a subject, some intelligent, some directly opposing. Doesn't matter. You can edit it down to 3 or 4 people, and then use only the part those three or 4 said that you like, to make really ANY point you want! So this format is worthless except as propaganda, in the purest sense of the word.
Click to expand...
iLOL
Are you suggesting that in-general liberals do not believe the things espoused by those liberals interviewed? I hope not.
Are you suggesting that black people are incapable of what those interviewed clearly knew they were capable? I hop not.

Your whole position is absurd.

Tell you what, you go out there and find random black folks to interview, you will find the same thing. These supposed barriers against voting with ID do not exist, well, except for those who have no interest in voting anyways.
 
Quazimodo said:
So, where do you go next? Let's say that each state sends out Photo Id Vans staffed with photographers and identification specialists. The service will be free. The poor, forgotten and downtrodden living in the shadows of valleys of hell call in and request a picture ID so they can be a responsible, enfranchised, voting members of this great nation of ours. You're going to tell me that they can't afford phones, right.

Nobody in this country lives beyond telephone or cellphone coverage. If they have access to a phone, they have access to a photo ID. Your schtick is laughable. Please stop. Instead of running away from the problem, embrace it. Blacks, as you seem to think, are NOT ignorant cave dwellers incapable of communicating with the outside world.

People like you represent the pathetically racist little college students in the YouTube presentation. Blacks want to be a part of this country and they are capable and proud enough to accomplish their goals without having to rely on alibi artists like you.
Click to expand...

OK, you don't want to have a serious conversation so you result to BS misrepresentations of any argument 'liberals' have actually made on the subject, ignore the points I did make, that are also the points made in several court cases where these laws were struck down, then proceed to insults, of course. So you make an argument that is evidence and fact free, then insult me for making evidence based arguments. And of course there is nothing new in that approach on this subject. If you want to discuss GOP photo ID rules, there are several dozen threads where I've laid out my arguments many times in detail.

I just find it hilarious that the OP was about liberals crying 'racism' when it wasn't, and then you guys jump right in and label liberals or their positions as "racist" when the actual issue is we simply disagree or are relying on different evidence to come to conclusions, and so demonstrate that at least for some of you the 'racism' allegations are a simple case of projection.
 
JasperL said:
OK, you don't want to have a serious conversation so you result to BS misrepresentations of any argument 'liberals' have actually made on the subject, ignore the points I did make, that are also the points made in several court cases where these laws were struck down, then proceed to insults, of course. So you make an argument that is evidence and fact free, then insult me for making evidence based arguments. And of course there is nothing new in that approach on this subject. If you want to discuss GOP photo ID rules, there are several dozen threads where I've laid out my arguments many times in detail.

I just find it hilarious that the OP was about liberals crying 'racism' when it wasn't, and then you guys jump right in and label liberals or their positions as "racist" when the actual issue is we simply disagree or are relying on different evidence to come to conclusions, and so demonstrate that at least for some of you the 'racism' allegations are a simple case of projection.
Click to expand...

You, Sir, are a racist, and worse, a racist in full and open denial. My time spent with you is over. Nothing you can or will say has significance to me. When I see your avatar, I will simply keep on moving. I will never be able to regain the time I have wasted on you.
 
Excon said:
Yes, after you were told, your lack of knowledge concerning that clearly indicated that you had not watched it.
Click to expand...

Right, didn't claim I did. In fact said I don't care what Ari thinks about anything, and I still don't after watching the video.

Doh!
Why would I do that?
Click to expand...

So I don't have to repeat myself, but suit yourself. I don't care what you do.

People stating their opinions vs those who state what they know, is not hackery.
Click to expand...

You'll have to explain the difference. Was there something in that video that represents the "TRUTH" and against which there is no argument?

iLOL
Are you suggesting that in-general liberals do not believe the things espoused by those liberals interviewed? I hope not.
Are you suggesting that black people are incapable of what those interviewed clearly knew they were capable? I hop not.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that Trump supporters in general are NOT white nationalists like David Duke? David Duke is a big supporter, I can find video of him (and others in my area with a day of filming) espousing white nationalist views. Ergo, "Trump supporters" believe what David Duke believes. Q.E.D.

And, no, blacks aren't 'incapable' of getting ID, and if I make that argument, you be sure to correct me! Otherwise, it is what we call a STRAW MAN.

Your whole position is absurd.
Click to expand...

Well, yes, it's easy to make up someone's position, then prove the made up position is absurd.

Tell you what, you go out there and find random black folks to interview, you will find the same thing. These supposed barriers against voting with ID do not exist, well, except for those who have no interest in voting anyways.
Click to expand...

Tell you what - read a few of the court cases, including at the appeals court level. The "supposed barriers" are not supposed, they are real. The thing is when people are in court, they have to actually back up their bull****. So it's a nice place to see the BS stripped away. It's why the voter ID laws keep getting struck down, no matter the ideology of the court.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom