Donald Trump and US politics

"

SarahAustin wrote:

To avoid sounding dumb, interpreters modify Trumps language:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmQFJlWhmCU

Americans increasingly Trump is incompetent:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjMIqZA_URU

Trump stuff admits to planting fake news to counter twitter meldowns:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjsOC0gtCbY

You cant make this shit up, but of course his blind followers will deny all this and somehow Trump is still a great president. Just lol at all this shit.

Oh and this shit too of course. Trump lying about the transgender bathroom issue:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5aOAmuuHlg

"

Budget_player_cadet wrote:

On a side note, for anyone wondering why "all lives matter" gets so much shit, how many times have you heard that phrase when it wasn't a response to "black lives matter"? I'm guessing somewhere in the range of "almost never" to "never". And as a response to "black lives matter", it is woefully misguided.

"

Xavderion wrote:

[shilling for Pakman intensifies]

"

Aim_Deep wrote:

Why u even posting here aint u german?

"

“Just a few years ago, this hate-filled, left-wing fascist group hijacked the very term ‘alt-right,’ ” he said. “That term, alt-right — it had been used for a long time in a very good and normal way, but this group has hijacked it.”

"

Vhlad wrote:

When someone says #BLM doesn't care about black on black violence, it's not equivalent to saying black people don't care about black on black violence. It's disingenuous/duplicitous to call bullshit based on examples of black people rallying against black on black violence - the implication is that all black people identify with #BLM or that #BLM shares the same views/priorities as all black people but we know that's not the case, as there are critics of #BLM who are black.

With respect to your specific examples, #BLM is not alpha phi alpha. #BLM is not Ta-Nehisi Coates. What groups or individuals who may support BLM to various degrees care about is not necessarily equivalent to what #BLM cares about. I'm not making a statement about what #BLM does or doesn't care about, simply pointing out that you're once again reframing/twisting what people say to launch a rebuttal.

An honest rebuttal would require finding instances of the #BLM movement itself rallying against black on black violence, talking about it, protesting it, etc.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Those gaps in education, income, and wealth are primarily geographical in nature. Our urban areas are blighted. African-Americans tend to be the dominant ethnic population in these areas, but if you're a white kid growing up in a "black area" it's the same shitty schools, shitty policing, shitty street culture.

"

You had thousands of black people going into white communities to work every day. Why didn't they settle in the residential areas closer to work? Rent pricing was a factor, yes, but not one that couldn't be overcome; the difference was slight.

"

The truth is that Detroit's racism wasn't unidirectional, it was a two-way street, a relationship. The worst racism I saw was, sans one crazy landlord I briefly worked for and an instance of a white person getting shot by a black man while I sat on a couch (both previous OT threads), was against white people. Self-segregation is real.

"

Still, the plight of our urban areas, due to decades of Democratic control of municipal government, is regrettable. We could fix a lot with Republican mayors.

"

All this "black" and "white" talk sickens me. Yuck. Skin color shouldn't fucking matter. Disgusting that it does. I feel contaminated by the labels.

"

Lastly, maybe we should have that debate on climate change sometime. Of course global warming is a thing, but it's greatly exaggerated for doomsaying click-bait purposes, to the extent that it should have little to no impact on policy.

"

deathflower wrote:

When people response to "black lives matter" with "all lives matter", it become a direct mockery that their lives doesn't. Why do people pick bad slogans if they wish to advocate equal right? People could have protest for equal right without crashing with "black lives matter" movement. That is not what people choose to do. They are guilty of sabotage, using equal right as the invisibility cloak to hide their malicious intent, that is not only grievous but hideous. “All Lives Matter” is the distraction that failed to address social issues.

Identity politics is as guilty as being the uniting force as it is being the dividing force, it is not going away. Identity politics just need to do it better.

"

soneka101 wrote:

left-wing fascist group

"

Budget_player_cadet wrote:

"

Vhlad wrote:

When someone says #BLM doesn't care about black on black violence, it's not equivalent to saying black people don't care about black on black violence. It's disingenuous/duplicitous to call bullshit based on examples of black people rallying against black on black violence - the implication is that all black people identify with #BLM or that #BLM shares the same views/priorities as all black people but we know that's not the case, as there are critics of #BLM who are black.

With respect to your specific examples, #BLM is not alpha phi alpha. #BLM is not Ta-Nehisi Coates. What groups or individuals who may support BLM to various degrees care about is not necessarily equivalent to what #BLM cares about. I'm not making a statement about what #BLM does or doesn't care about, simply pointing out that you're once again reframing/twisting what people say to launch a rebuttal.

An honest rebuttal would require finding instances of the #BLM movement itself rallying against black on black violence, talking about it, protesting it, etc.

#BLM is a movement with specific goals. It exists to fight the systemic violence upon the black community, first and foremost being the victimization by the police - which contributes in a significant way to black on black crime. Criticizing #BLM for not spending a lot of time going after police violence is like criticizing the National Right To Life Committee for not marching against the death penalty.

That said, the closest thing to an official website of the movement has an excellent response to this.

http://blacklivesmatter.com/11-major-misconceptions-about-the-black-lives-matter-movement/

1. The movement doesn’t care about black-on-black crime. The idea that black-on-black crime is not a significant political conversation among black people is patently false. In Chicago, long maligned for its high rates of intraracial murder, members of the community created the Violence Interrupters to disrupt violent altercations before they escalate. However, those who insist on talking about black-on-black crime frequently fail to acknowledge that most crime is intraracial. Ninety-three percent of black murder victims are killed by other black people. Eighty-four percent of white murder victims are killed by other white people. The continued focus on black-on-black crime is a diversionary tactic, whose goal is to suggest that black people don’t have the right to be outraged about police violence in vulnerable black communities, because those communities have a crime problem. The Black Lives Matter movement acknowledges the crime problem, but it refuses to locate that crime problem as a problem of black pathology. Black people are not inherently more violent or more prone to crime than other groups. But black people are disproportionately poorer, more likely to be targeted by police and arrested, and more likely to attend poor or failing schools. All of these social indicators place one at greater risk for being either a victim or a perpetrator of violent crime. To reduce violent crime, we must fight to change systems, rather than demonizing people.

Emphasis mine. And it really is little more than a red herring. If you look at when people search for "Black on Black Crime" on google, it turns out it coincides with certain events...

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Those gaps in education, income, and wealth are primarily geographical in nature. Our urban areas are blighted. African-Americans tend to be the dominant ethnic population in these areas, but if you're a white kid growing up in a "black area" it's the same shitty schools, shitty policing, shitty street culture.

And we know why they're blighted. It's not, as you imply below, because of "democratic control". It's because of the enduring legacy of racism, which makes it exceedingly hard for people to gather any upwards mobility. It's due to redlining (which is still a thing, despite being illegal). It's due to white flight (also still a thing). There are a variety of social and economic factors, but from my understanding, this gap persists even independent of that. That is to say, white students in these situations do better, and black students going to schools in affluent suburbs do worse than their white costudents. I can't quite find the research I read yonks back, if anyone else knows what I'm talking about, please feel free to post the cite.

"

You had thousands of black people going into white communities to work every day. Why didn't they settle in the residential areas closer to work? Rent pricing was a factor, yes, but not one that couldn't be overcome; the difference was slight.

Redlining is a factor. Maybe they couldn't find an apartment because they weren't shown any vacancies. And of course, moving is, in and of itself, really freakin' expensive. Even if a different rental is similarly priced, the cost of uprooting and setting up shop in an entirely different place can be pretty steep.

"

The truth is that Detroit's racism wasn't unidirectional, it was a two-way street, a relationship. The worst racism I saw was, sans one crazy landlord I briefly worked for and an instance of a white person getting shot by a black man while I sat on a couch (both previous OT threads), was against white people. Self-segregation is real.

I don't disagree (marginalization festers resentment), but I doubt that this is the most significant contribution.

"

Still, the plight of our urban areas, due to decades of Democratic control of municipal government, is regrettable. We could fix a lot with Republican mayors.

I have no idea how you came to this conclusion. It's not like there's a significant correlation between republican control and effective governance of cities. Most cities are run by democrats.

"

All this "black" and "white" talk sickens me. Yuck. Skin color shouldn't fucking matter. Disgusting that it does. I feel contaminated by the labels.

It shouldn't. But it does. And until it doesn't, pretending it doesn't leads us to missing the big picture in dangerous ways.

"

Lastly, maybe we should have that debate on climate change sometime. Of course global warming is a thing, but it's greatly exaggerated for doomsaying click-bait purposes, to the extent that it should have little to no impact on policy.

Maybe I'll start a thread later.