• 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!

Trump's Many Racist Supporters

LMAO you leftists didn't whine about debt when BO double it. All of a sudden debt is very, very important? LOL Get real.

Since when have leftists been concerned with pissing money away?

Is that the extent of your argumentative strategy? Trying to derail the conversation by pointing out supposed leftist strategies or hypocrisies?

As to your question, the reason that I did not care about Obama's additions to the debt is because they were designed to achieve a purpose - to prevent a depression and to bring us out of a recession during a very real crisis when private monetary institutions could not cover their own asses, thus forcing the government to do so. And based off objective facts like private employment, the unemployment rate, the stock market, corporate profits, those strategies worked.

Trump's tax policy adds massively to the debt out of the singular goal of benefitting himself.
 
Last edited:
How is it different from Blacks voting for Obama at the time, or for Hillary now, because both were and are pandering for their votes?
Trump is a clown, but he isn't the racist and neither are his supporters. Look at the other side more carefully

This isn't just a matter of demographic tendencies - it is not like I am saying, "White people support Trump, therefore he is a racist." I am breaking down the specific opinions and attitudes of those specific white people and then tying it directly to Trump's statements and actions.

There are Black racists and to the extent that they supported a particular candidate because of their rhetoric (like Louis Farrakhan supporting Trump because his policies are closest to being anti-semitic), then you can criticize the candidate. Pointing out that black people vote democrat does not qualify.
 
Why is it assumed that if a white person loves his own people, he must hate others?

There is a difference between "loving your own people" and thinking "my people are superior to other races."
 
There is a difference between "loving your own people" and thinking "my people are superior to other races."

If by "superior" you mean "ontologically superior":

And who has said that? As far as I can tell, that's just a leftist strawman, none/very few of the people who get called racists believe in intrinsic superiority.

If by "superior" you mean "practically superior":

Then people believe this because it is obviously and unequivocally true. European (and European-descended) civilization is not equal to others. It towers over them. Thus people the world over seek to possess white medicine, white technology, etc. And adopt white political system, and white philosophies.

Heck, in spouting anti-racism, you are implicitly acknowledging the superiority of the white race, since you are purporting that the colorblind worldview of whites is superior to the racist worldview of colored peoples (note that even before liberalism took over, Europeans were one of the least ethnocentric peoples in the world).
 
As many who have followed Trump's campaign closely knows, the link between Trump and racist supporters is nearly undeniable. Prominent white supremacists have voiced their explicit support for Trump, some have recorded robocalls encouraging white individuals to vote for Trump, and white supremacist groups have repeatedly shown up to Trump rallies. The reason for their support is numerous, but they likely have viewed Trump's unwillingness to condemn their group, their level of access to his campaign, or that his speeches are eerily similar to KKK speeches from the 1920s as implicit, if not explicit, endorsement.

However, this Washington Post article really delves into some data to back up the anecdotal stories outlined above. For example, this Pew Research Poll released Thursday found that while 59 percent of voters nationwide believe that diversity is beneficial to America and that only 8 percent believe diversity makes America worse, those numbers are 39% and 17% respectively for Trump supporters. And the data doesn't stop there. This analysis of a Post/ABC News Poll found that economic anxiety was just as predictive, if not slightly less so, than those expressed concern over whether whites are losing out because of preferences towards black and latino individuals. And that factor persisted even after controlling for other variables, like demographics or attitudes. The article goes to cite more data, like the link between Trump support in an area and higher middle-aged white death rates or in areas where the number of google search queries that are racists are high.

Many of Trump’s supporters have racist motivations for backing him: Not all — but a lot of ’em. And while it is unfair to paint all Trump backers as bigoted, it’s impossible to ignore a growing volume of public-opinion data showing that a large number of his supporters are indeed driven by racial animus.

Most Trump supporters are working middle class . Workers tire of endless regulations , taxes , and 4th generation welfare . Those that are tired of illegals invading our Country and costing taxpayers billions for their schooling , healthcare , food stamps , etc. And as we all know the left loves to label everyone racist if they disagree with their views .
 
So then don't vote for Trump. Nobody's forcing you to do it. Why do you care what his dopey supporters think? The white racists usually vote for the Republicans anyway.

You are right about that because he will never win
 
Considering the dictionary definition of "Racism"...

And the definition of Affirmative Action....

And the fact that almost All, near 100% of Bernie and/or Hillary supporters believe in Affirmative Action...

It is clear that Trump supporters do not have anywhere near as many Racists per capita as Hillary or Bernies supports.

Sorry, Lefties, the fact is, you're almost all RACISTS.

-
 
As many who have followed Trump's campaign closely knows, the link between Trump and racist supporters is nearly undeniable. Prominent white supremacists have voiced their explicit support for Trump, some have recorded robocalls encouraging white individuals to vote for Trump, and white supremacist groups have repeatedly shown up to Trump rallies. The reason for their support is numerous, but they likely have viewed Trump's unwillingness to condemn their group, their level of access to his campaign, or that his speeches are eerily similar to KKK speeches from the 1920s as implicit, if not explicit, endorsement.

However, this Washington Post article really delves into some data to back up the anecdotal stories outlined above. For example, this Pew Research Poll released Thursday found that while 59 percent of voters nationwide believe that diversity is beneficial to America and that only 8 percent believe diversity makes America worse, those numbers are 39% and 17% respectively for Trump supporters. And the data doesn't stop there. This analysis of a Post/ABC News Poll found that economic anxiety was just as predictive, if not slightly less so, than those expressed concern over whether whites are losing out because of preferences towards black and latino individuals. And that factor persisted even after controlling for other variables, like demographics or attitudes. The article goes to cite more data, like the link between Trump support in an area and higher middle-aged white death rates or in areas where the number of google search queries that are racists are high.

Many of Trump’s supporters have racist motivations for backing him: Not all — but a lot of ’em. And while it is unfair to paint all Trump backers as bigoted, it’s impossible to ignore a growing volume of public-opinion data showing that a large number of his supporters are indeed driven by racial animus.

I couldn't read any of the Washington Post links. Apparently I've reached my limit for the month in reading them. :shrug: Stupid pay walls. Anyways, mind showing me where in all of that it shows the respondents as being racist? Or is that just insinuated by your WP sources? I can't tell since I can't access them.
 
Most Trump supporters are usually white working middle class with lower education and some degree of racial bias. Workers tire of endless regulations , taxes , and 4th generation welfare . Those that are tired of illegals invading our Country and costing taxpayers billions for their schooling , healthcare , food stamps , etc. And as we all know the left loves to label everyone racist if they disagree with their views .

Went ahead and fixed that one for you. And listen, I get the argument that economic anxiety is connected with support for Trump - this research finds that to be a good predictor as well. But the fact is that there are multiple reasons, as outlined above and that go beyond the mere "that's a classic leftist attack," to say that one of the strongest predictive links between a voter and their support for Trump are racial biases and racial anxiety.
 
I couldn't read any of the Washington Post links. Apparently I've reached my limit for the month in reading them. :shrug: Stupid pay walls. Anyways, mind showing me where in all of that it shows the respondents as being racist? Or is that just insinuated by your WP sources? I can't tell since I can't access them.

That is really odd - I haven't run across that pay wall issue before...hmm...anyways, it isn't like this article found some poll where it asked Trump supporters, "Are you a racist?" And then a significant percentage respondent in the affirmative. It relies on somewhat circumstantial evidence.

I suppose to some extent it depends on whether you consider that a belief that diversity hurts America to be evidence of a racist belief, or whether you believe concern that whites are losing out because of preferences towards latinos and blacks is evidence of a racist belief, or whether a geographic link between support for Trump and racist google search queries is evidence of a racist belief. The article also notes some other predictive factors for Trump supporters that are just as likely, or possibly more so, to predict support for Trump (quoted below) and, for some, it would be reasonable to believe that these are also evidence of a racist belief system - but to a lesser degree than the three I outlined just now.

approval of deporting undocumented immigrants, strong feelings that the government is dysfunctional, and support for banning Muslims from entering the United States. (Authoritarian child-rearing attitudes, believed by some to be closely related to Trump support, were less predictive.)

As evidenced by many of the respondents to this thread, the notion that all of the above discussed predictive links are individually and collectively evidence of a racist belief system is apparently a questionable conclusion.
 
Went ahead and fixed that one for you. And listen, I get the argument that economic anxiety is connected with support for Trump - this research finds that to be a good predictor as well. But the fact is that there are multiple reasons, as outlined above and that go beyond the mere "that's a classic leftist attack," to say that one of the strongest predictive links between a voter and their support for Trump are racial biases and racial anxiety.

First of all I think it is against the rules to alter someone's comments in a reply ! I don't need you to fix anything I post ! If you disagree with me that 's fine but don't stoop to loathsome tactics , Thank You ! :censored
 
As many who have followed Trump's campaign closely knows, the link between Trump and racist supporters is nearly undeniable. Prominent white supremacists have voiced their explicit support for Trump, some have recorded robocalls encouraging white individuals to vote for Trump, and white supremacist groups have repeatedly shown up to Trump rallies. The reason for their support is numerous, but they likely have viewed Trump's unwillingness to condemn their group, their level of access to his campaign, or that his speeches are eerily similar to KKK speeches from the 1920s as implicit, if not explicit, endorsement.

However, this Washington Post article really delves into some data to back up the anecdotal stories outlined above. For example, this Pew Research Poll released Thursday found that while 59 percent of voters nationwide believe that diversity is beneficial to America and that only 8 percent believe diversity makes America worse, those numbers are 39% and 17% respectively for Trump supporters. And the data doesn't stop there. This analysis of a Post/ABC News Poll found that economic anxiety was just as predictive, if not slightly less so, than those expressed concern over whether whites are losing out because of preferences towards black and latino individuals. And that factor persisted even after controlling for other variables, like demographics or attitudes. The article goes to cite more data, like the link between Trump support in an area and higher middle-aged white death rates or in areas where the number of google search queries that are racists are high.

Many of Trump’s supporters have racist motivations for backing him: Not all — but a lot of ’em. And while it is unfair to paint all Trump backers as bigoted, it’s impossible to ignore a growing volume of public-opinion data showing that a large number of his supporters are indeed driven by racial animus.
I disagree. First off candidates do not pick their supporters and Trump is not the first to have this happen to them. Secondly, I disagree that a large number of his supporters are racists, heck every candidate has racists that support them, (note: not all racists are white), he just has a few more than some of the other candidates and a few are of the vocal variety. All that said, Trump is not in any way fashion or form Presidential material and his lead in the GOP only shows how far this Nation has fallen in demanding quality and substance of our leaders.
 
I disagree. First off candidates do not pick their supporters and Trump is not the first to have this happen to them. Secondly, I disagree that a large number of his supporters are racists, heck every candidate has racists that support them, (note: not all racists are white), he just has a few more than some of the other candidates and a few are of the vocal variety. All that said, Trump is not in any way fashion or form Presidential material and his lead in the GOP only shows how far this Nation has fallen in demanding quality and substance of our leaders.

Wait...I don't understand your argument. What are you disagreeing with? That Trump has a higher proportion of racist supporters or that these individuals can be classified as racists? Or are you making the argument that his higher proportion of racist supporters doesn't really matter because all candidates have racist supporters, to some extent?

And as I pointed out to others, the extent of reasoning for why these individuals are supporters doesn't stop at the fact that they are predominantly white. The research delves into their specifically racist attitudes and beliefs as well.

As to your assessment of Trump, you'll get no argument from me there.
 
Wait...I don't understand your argument. What are you disagreeing with? That Trump has a higher proportion of racist supporters or that these individuals can be classified as racists? Or are you making the argument that his higher proportion of racist supporters doesn't really matter because all candidates have racist supporters, to some extent?

And as I pointed out to others, the extent of reasoning for why these individuals are supporters doesn't stop at the fact that they are predominantly white. The research delves into their specifically racist attitudes and beliefs as well.

As to your assessment of Trump, you'll get no argument from me there.

My argument is that I disagree that a large number of his supporters are racists.
Well it is the GOP so the majority of those that would be labeled as racists would be white, the opposite is true when it comes to Dems, that is why I mentioned that point.
I doubt I would get an argument form most people on Trump, be they Con or Lib, thankfully Most Americans see Trump for what he is, it when they don't see it is when we are done as a People/Nation.
 
Why is it assumed that if a white person loves his own people, he must hate others?

Speak for yourself. I don't think of white persons as my "people". It is just skin pigment for God's sake. People come in all colors.
 
That is really odd - I haven't run across that pay wall issue before...hmm...anyways, it isn't like this article found some poll where it asked Trump supporters, "Are you a racist?" And then a significant percentage respondent in the affirmative. It relies on somewhat circumstantial evidence.

I suppose to some extent it depends on whether you consider that a belief that diversity hurts America to be evidence of a racist belief, or whether you believe concern that whites are losing out because of preferences towards latinos and blacks is evidence of a racist belief, or whether a geographic link between support for Trump and racist google search queries is evidence of a racist belief. The article also notes some other predictive factors for Trump supporters that are just as likely, or possibly more so, to predict support for Trump (quoted below) and, for some, it would be reasonable to believe that these are also evidence of a racist belief system - but to a lesser degree than the three I outlined just now.



As evidenced by many of the respondents to this thread, the notion that all of the above discussed predictive links are individually and collectively evidence of a racist belief system is apparently a questionable conclusion.

I went through that pew research study and when it came to the question about diversity I saw the chart and then looked for the question. Know what the difference was? The chart has it broken down by candidate. The question (question 62 btw) doesn't even have it broken down into parties, much less candidates. So how would they know who supports what on that chart?

Next their percentage of error is, quite frankly amazingly huge. Most studies only allow for an error percentage of 1-2 points. This one has 8.1 percentage points for Kasich supporters alone. Trump supporters at 6.1. Cruz supporters at 6.9. Hillary and Sanders 5.3 and 6.1 respectively. In a world full of studies, those error points would be highly questionable.

And yes, it is a questionable conclusion. There is no doubt that there are racists that support Trump. But there is also a conflict in what is and isn't considered racism. IIRC you and I even disagree on what is and isn't racist. Though I may be thinking of someone else. :shrug:
 
How cliche. Sad. Leftists can't do any better than cry racism. ROTFLMAO

Is there a reason why conservatives such as yourself find it so important to deny that racism exists?




After a while, a man could get to thinking that it has something to do with an agenda....
 
I went through that pew research study and when it came to the question about diversity I saw the chart and then looked for the question. Know what the difference was? The chart has it broken down by candidate. The question (question 62 btw) doesn't even have it broken down into parties, much less candidates. So how would they know who supports what on that chart?


A valid question, but not one that I could answer without asking the author of the article. Perhaps they interviewed the researcher or reviewed his notes and the data that they obtained from the Pew Research center is a bit more explicit compared to what was contained in the report.

Next their percentage of error is, quite frankly amazingly huge. Most studies only allow for an error percentage of 1-2 points. This one has 8.1 percentage points for Kasich supporters alone. Trump supporters at 6.1. Cruz supporters at 6.9. Hillary and Sanders 5.3 and 6.1 respectively. In a world full of studies, those error points would be highly questionable.

You're delving into a margin of error issues which is a direct result of how many of those specific supporters that they managed to interview. A margin of error of ~6 points still means that they would have surveyed roughly 3-400 individuals of each supporter. Certainly a statistician would want as much data as possible, but that margin is enough to draw some conclusions. And given the rest of the anecdotal evidence and the other statistical analysis conducted, the conclusion that more racists support Trump is still a valid one.

And yes, it is a questionable conclusion. There is no doubt that there are racists that support Trump. But there is also a conflict in what is and isn't considered racism. IIRC you and I even disagree on what is and isn't racist. Though I may be thinking of someone else. :shrug:

I'm not sure on that point. I tend to believe that the KKK represents a racist group and that other groups which hold themselves out to be white supremacists groups would also classify as a racist group. And given the unwillingness by Trump to reject the KKK during the interview, the fact that white supremacists groups recorded robocalls for Trump, and the fact that Trump's campaign allowed white supremacist groups access to their campaign (an interview with his son specifically), I stand by the conclusion that Trump attracts a higher proportion of racists.
 
A valid question, but not one that I could answer without asking the author of the article. Perhaps they interviewed the researcher or reviewed his notes and the data that they obtained from the Pew Research center is a bit more explicit compared to what was contained in the report.

"Perhaps", "maybe", "shoulda coulda woulda". We could speculate all day. The point of putting out that study the way that they did was to show their methods and how things were asked. If they didn't include all of it then either the parts that they didn't include were not valid enough or they were trying to hide something. I'm going to easily give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that the parts they didn't include were found to not be valid. Either way, speculating on it isn't going to solve anything.

You're delving into a margin of error issues which is a direct result of how many of those specific supporters that they managed to interview. A margin of error of ~6 points still means that they would have surveyed roughly 3-400 individuals of each supporter. Certainly a statistician would want as much data as possible, but that margin is enough to draw some conclusions. And given the rest of the anecdotal evidence and the other statistical analysis conducted, the conclusion that more racists support Trump is still a valid one.

I can't remember where I heard it, but for an accurate study to be done statistic wise on something specific you need at least 1000-2000 respondents. Less than that and the errors increase exponentially. 3-400 people is not something I would bet any money on. Here's the table for their samples...

Total sample
2,254 2.4 percentage points​
Registered voters
1,787 2.6 percentage points​

Republican/Lean Rep
834 3.9 percentage points​
Trump supporters
331 6.1 percentage points​
Cruz supporters
261 6.9 percentage points​
Kasich supporters
191 8.1 percentage points​

Democrat/Lean Dem
842 3.8 percentage points​
Clinton supporters
451 5.3 percentage points​
Sanders supporters
331 6.1 percentage points​

They have the 2+k respondents. But they don't have near that amount when measuring candidate supporters individually.

I'm not sure on that point. I tend to believe that the KKK represents a racist group and that other groups which hold themselves out to be white supremacists groups would also classify as a racist group. And given the unwillingness by Trump to reject the KKK during the interview, the fact that white supremacists groups recorded robocalls for Trump, and the fact that Trump's campaign allowed white supremacist groups access to their campaign (an interview with his son specifically), I stand by the conclusion that Trump attracts a higher proportion of racists.

All circumstantial. Never hold up in a court of law.
 
I tend to believe that the KKK represents a racist group and that other groups which hold themselves out to be white supremacists groups would also classify as a racist group. And given the unwillingness by Trump to reject the KKK during the interview, the fact that white supremacists groups recorded robocalls for Trump, and the fact that Trump's campaign allowed white supremacist groups access to their campaign (an interview with his son specifically), I stand by the conclusion that Trump attracts a higher proportion of racists.
2) If a stranger on my block walks down the street and screams "VElvis hates girl scout cookies," and I refuse to respond (probably because he's a kook, and I just don't want to get into it with him), does that make his claim accurate? (Mind you...I am a self-proclaimed Samoa addict. I just don't shout it from the rooftops.)

3) If that same kooky stranger decided to tell the girl scouts that he's Velvis (when he's not), and he tells the neighborhood girl scout, that he hates her cookies. Does that mean I have to hate those cookies too?

Your little association game is weaksauce. Come back when he specifically says that he supports a specific group, and not when he ignores one. Otherwise, it's just as easy to say that Hillary and Bernie HATE rich people, and want EVERYONE to be poor. Two can play this stupid game.
 
"Perhaps", "maybe", "shoulda coulda woulda". We could speculate all day. The point of putting out that study the way that they did was to show their methods and how things were asked. If they didn't include all of it then either the parts that they didn't include were not valid enough or they were trying to hide something. I'm going to easily give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that the parts they didn't include were found to not be valid. Either way, speculating on it isn't going to solve anything.

The hard data involved combined with the circumstantial and anecdotal evidence combine to make this argument more than mere speculation.

I can't remember where I heard it, but for an accurate study to be done statistic wise on something specific you need at least 1000-2000 respondents. Less than that and the errors increase exponentially. 3-400 people is not something I would bet any money on. Here's the table for their samples...

Lot of Numbers

They have the 2+k respondents. But they don't have near that amount when measuring candidate supporters individually.

Like I said, a statistician will want as much data as much and you are correct to note that a sample size of 1500 is usually a desirable goal because the MoE sits around +/- 3 points and the standards of deviation get a bit more solidified. But one aspect that you're forgetting is the fact that we can look to the research data and try to adjust for margin of error and it's possible to see that Trump supporters are still quite likely to hold higher amounts of racist beliefs.

For example, with the diversity datapoint - if you adjust the data to the extremes, then the percentage of Trump supporters who believe diversity is a bad thing (again, specifically believe that America is worse with more diversity), then anywhere from 11% - 23% of Trump supporters believe diversity is a bad thing. That compares to a range of 5.5%-10.5% nationwide. Even if you assume the extremes in favor of Trump supporters, they are still higher than the national average. Is it possible that the percentages are closer? Yes, but statistics tells us that the closer you work to pull those numbers, the more unlikely because of the standards of deviation.

All circumstantial. Never hold up in a court of law.

First off, circumstantial evidence routinely can be the only source of evidence in a court of law and result in a positive case disposition for the side using only circumstantial evidence. Second, there is no "court of law" associated with this information - only public opinion and the data used to support that public opinion.
 
Last edited:
2) If a stranger on my block walks down the street and screams "VElvis hates girl scout cookies," and I refuse to respond (probably because he's a kook, and I just don't want to get into it with him), does that make his claim accurate? (Mind you...I am a self-proclaimed Samoa addict. I just don't shout it from the rooftops.)

3) If that same kooky stranger decided to tell the girl scouts that he's Velvis (when he's not), and he tells the neighborhood girl scout, that he hates her cookies. Does that mean I have to hate those cookies too?

Your little association game is weaksauce. Come back when he specifically says that he supports a specific group, and not when he ignores one. Otherwise, it's just as easy to say that Hillary and Bernie HATE rich people, and want EVERYONE to be poor. Two can play this stupid game.

If you truly believe that an unwillingness to disassociate yourself from a very obviously racist group when you are asked about it specifically and repeatedly (not just some guy walking down the street) is not evidence of racism (or at least pretending to be a racist), then I am not going to convince you otherwise.
 
If you truly believe that an unwillingness to disassociate yourself from a very obviously racist group when you are asked about it specifically and repeatedly (not just some guy walking down the street) is not evidence of racism (or at least pretending to be a racist), then I am not going to convince you otherwise.

No you won't ever convince me. There have been lots of people I just won't give the satisfaction of acknowledgment, but that doesn't mean I agree with them or associate with them.
 
Is there a reason why conservatives such as yourself find it so important to deny that racism exists?

It would be foolish to deny racism exists. However, it does not exist to the rampant extent leftists believe it does. Everywhere a leftist looks, they find racism. It's ridiculous to the point of being sad. IF you leftists didn't look for it at every turn, maybe a lot of it would go away? Hmmmm, food for thought. And you might find your world of misery might get a little better.

After a while, a man could get to thinking that it has something to do with an agenda....

True, but the "agenda" is a leftist agenda of keeping everyone divide up and put into neat little boxes. Geez, you leftists really, really need to lighten up and enjoy life for a change instead being so uptight all the time. Smile once.
 
Back
Top Bottom