Unpacking Donald Trump's controversial Tweet

[Cooky]

I'm really not surprised to see the complacency of some of the people here regarding the racist comment by Trump.

Well, these women haven't been very respectful to others, even to their own fellow party members. So it's hard to feel sorry for them.

 

[Cooky]

If Trump made a straight-forward racist statement, unveiled, I would condemn it.

...But he never has. All we have are assumptions of intent.

...And when we add up all the things that seem like it, we're just 'cherry picking' -which falls under the fallacy of incomplete evidence.

Cherry picking - Wikipedia

 

[Cooky]

Essentially, this is a conspiratorial based debate, centered entirely on incomplete evidence and assumption.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

If Trump made a straight-forward racist statement, unveiled, I would condemn it.

...But he never has. All we have are assumptions of intent.

...And when we add up all the things that seem like it, we're just 'cherry picking' -which falls under the fallacy of incomplete evidence.

Cherry picking - Wikipedia

 

[Stevicus]

Look up the 4th and 5th amendments.

Okay, let's have a look:

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Nothing in here seems relevant to socialism.

Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

I suppose that last clause relating to private property might relate to socialism, although it seems like it would be okay if there's just compensation. Of course, defining what would constitute "just compensation" would be a subjective opinion.

Would you consider the Homestead Act and other programs designed to give land to the landless an example of socialism? Essentially, the government was giving away "free stuff" - something that conservatives decry as something horrible and shameful, because it's socialism.

 

[Cooky]

View attachment 31088

What factual evidence is there though that racism is a factor in this?

...I know in politics though, facts don't matter much. Which is why there exists so much anger in political debate. Because lack of facts in any debate is always chaotic.

 

[Stevicus]

What factual evidence is there though that racism is a factor in this?

I'm not sure if that's really a factor here. What I'm seeing is that there's a lot of wordsmithing and spin over the term "race" that people are looking for technicalities and loopholes to come back and say "You see? It's not racist at all."

I think both sides tend to get a bit too fixated on labels, as if the labels themselves mean more than the concept(s) being addressed.

 

[Twilight Hue]

No. I think it's only acceptable for black men to use that word toward other men specifically. It's a masculine term.

True.

I remember a lot of Richard Pryor stand up comedy.

 

[crossfire]

I'm really not surprised to see the complacency of some of the people here regarding the racist comment by Trump.

I'm not complacent about it by any means. I'm just worried about Pence getting in if Trump gets booted. (Yes we could have an even worse president than our current one! )

 

[SkepticThinker]

I did. Look at your comment again.




Referencing it as if Trump is going to do it is paranoia.

I bet you would have said the same thing in 1930's Germany.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Somalia.

Actually, I was questioning your claim that she is following the "socialist policy that destroyed her homeland."
I was wondering what policy you were referring to.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You assume he'll leave office if voted out.

I assume if there is a problem (I really doubt there will be) the military would be obligated to uphold the Constitution and enforce the transition of power as Trump at the time would no longer be the president. I don't actually know though, and I haven't been able to find anything to "guide and direct" such reasoning.

 

[Shad]

I bet you would have said the same thing in 1930's Germany.

Nope as there were laws passed and actual storm troopers connect to political leaders. Maybe read some of the history you are babbling about. Yawn. Good attempt at looking edgy. 2 stars

Actually, I was questioning your claim that she is following the "socialist policy that destroyed her homeland."
I was wondering what policy you were referring to.

She blames America instead of Venezuela and it's socialists for it's problems for one. She backs Maduro calling the political issues as coup attempt. That is an endorsement of policy.

Government healthcare monopoly which is the government control state of socialism. Paid post-secondary education. Guaranteed jobs and other parts of the New Green Deal.

 

[Shad]

I assume if there is a problem (I really doubt there will be) the military would be obligated to uphold the Constitution and enforce the transition of power as Trump at the time would no longer be the president. I don't actually know though, and I haven't been able to find anything to "guide and direct" such reasoning.

The US military can not operate domestically without a war or revolution as part of the conflict against citizens or government in that manner. It can not support a transition of power outside those points. You are suggesting something very dangerous as you are legitimizing the US military as part of and tool of internal politics. The Constitution was specially against this due to how monarch's used the military to oppress citizens.

Remember or have you read about use of national guard during the civil rights battles? That is just the national guard not say the Marine Corp which is full military.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The US military can not operate domestically without a war or revolution as part of the conflict against citizens or government in that manner. It can not support a transition of power outside those points. You are suggesting something very dangerous as you are legitimizing the US military as part of and tool of internal politics. The Constitution was specially against this due to how monarch's used the military to oppress citizens.

Remember or have you read about use of national guard during the civil rights battles? That is just the national guard not say the Marine Corp which is full military.

It's not an oppression of citizens, but enforcing the Constitution. And I would say a president who refuses to step down upon the Constitutionally defined moment is attempting to start a revolution that must be put down. In other words, stepping up to avert a legit Constitutional crisis.
But, information on such a thing has been in short supply when I have attempted to look. It's not the first time people have worried, and it probably won't be the last, but I haven't been able to find info about this "what if." However, there are other agents and organizations sworn to uphold the Constitution, and if not the military then it seems likely there is someone who would "clear the way" for the president elect as the former president is no longer the president.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

Wait, it was a Twitter comment right? Twitter just needs to ban his account.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Nope as there were laws passed and actual storm troopers connect to political leaders. Maybe read some of the history you are babbling about. Yawn. Good attempt at looking edgy. 2 stars

This stuff happens gradually, in small steps, over time so that before you know it, it's happening all around you and it's too far gone to stop it.
You should read Elie Wiesel's "Night" for some insight.

She blames America instead of Venezuela and it's socialists for it's problems for one. She backs Maduro calling the political issues as coup attempt. That is an endorsement of policy.

Government healthcare monopoly which is the government control state of socialism. Paid post-secondary education. Guaranteed jobs and other parts of the New Green Deal.

Are you not aware of the US's history in South American countries?
I'm not saying they're fully responsible, but there is some blame to go around.

The entire developed world (save for the US) has universal healthcare. Many countries pay for college (most of Europe does, I believe). I don't know what "guaranteed" jobs refers to. Those things don't destroy countries - they help make them better.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I'm not complacent about it by any means. I'm just worried about Pence getting in if Trump gets booted. (Yes we could have an even worse president than our current one! )

I've heard this before. Look I understand but Trump is not going to get impeached. But if someone is wrong I expect people to speak out against him being wrong not cower to the fear of pence being elected.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Well, these women haven't been very respectful to others, even to their own fellow party members. So it's hard to feel sorry for them.

So let us use absolutism and if you're not with us we'll be racist towards you does that sound right? Cadet bone spurs is not a respected person in office.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Essentially, this is a conspiratorial based debate, centered entirely on incomplete evidence and assumption.

I literally posted the tweet.