Let me be absolutely, unequivocally clear: if you support Donald Trump, you are a racist. After today's press conference, there is no alternative conclusion. If you support Donald Trump, you are a racist.
If you work for Donald Trump, you are a racist. I'm talking to you John Kelly, Sarah Sanders, Rex Tillerson, James Mattis, and the rest of you working in the White House or the administration. If you continue to work for Donald Trump, you are a racist.
If you are in Congress and you don't support impeachment, you are a racist. Under the Constitution, the House has wide latitude for determining cause for impeachment. Personally, I believe there is enough to prove obstruction of justice, especially since Congress is not bound to the standard of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
America fought the Civil War, in part, to abolish slavery. America fought World War II, in part, to eliminate nazi control over Europe. America must not soil that history by allowing a racist to serve as president of our United States. If you are in Congress and you don't support impeachment, you are a racist.
If you voted for Donald Trump and he is still your president, you are a racist. If you are a racist, you are far more representative of America's past than you are its future. If you are not a part of America's future, you will stay in America's past. By staying in America's past, you will become even more marginalized. As you become even more marginalized, you will once again blame others for your problems. But you need to know that racism and racist are not part of our America.
No matter how many rallies you hold. No matter how many hateful slogans you chant. No matter how many people you beat. No matter how many people you kill. You will not return America to its racist past. You will not stop progress. America rejects racism. America rejects racists. America rejects you.
I don't have a lot of hope that the nonvoters will vote,....
Daniel, about folks who don't vote, I heard on the news last summer (before Trump) that the percentage of Americans who don't vote is about the same as the percentage of Europeans who vote for their Social Democratic parties.
America's two parties don't allow competition, so wannabe social democrats here don't vote.
America's two parties don't allow competition...
... and they've often managed to establish special privileges for themselves, with higher bars to ballot access if you're not a Democrat or a Republican.
Our voting system doesn't help. Except for special cases like "vote for up to 9 out of these 27 people for Judge of the Court of Common Pleas", we're required to choose just one name, and shut up about all the others.
There's no way to indicate that, while you prefer candidate A, B would be almost equally acceptable while C is completely evil, or vice versa (A best, C also ok, B evil), or that you care only slightly about A winning over B and C. In each of those cases your ballot would look exactly the same and be counted the same; it wouldn't affect B's and C's chances any differently. (If voting machines weren't hacked.)
A vast improvement: on the ballots, instead of choosing just one name, let voters give each candidate anywhere from 0 to (say) 5 stars. Highest average rating wins.
This is an instance of range voting (or score voting). Read much more at http://rangevoting.org/ -- including tweaks to allow "no preference" abstentions on a candidate, and to require broad support rather than a few perfect ratings amidst a sea of "no preference" nonvotes.
The system can actually be used on current voting machines!
Mathematician Warren Smith concluded that range voting's improvement in minimizing voters' regret could be as significant as was the introduction of democracy itself ("first past the post" vs. ignoring ballots and randomly or dictatorially choosing a winner).
Are you saying that, in the case of Trumps winning the presidency, the ones who didn't vote did in fact indirectly voted for Trump because otherwise had they actually voted then Trump would not have won?
Thats ok abut the reports. I just wanted to make sure I understood you correctly as this is another lesson for me.
I was checking out the Southern Poverty Law Center and one menu was "Extremist profiles" which list individuals who have extremist ideologies and are the position of power and/or influence.
So why isn't Donald Trump on the list?
He has his own brand of hatred and the only one where he is his own membership. He was this way before the presidency but his work was business ventures. Probably hardly worth it to make the list.
But he now has the Oval Office, one of the most powerful seat of government in the world, and Donald Trump has millions of followers. He refuses to condemn the hate group of the recent Charlottesville White Nationalist rally to the point of defending this hate group by pointing out all sides are violent.
So the very reason of the powerful Oval Office makes Donald Trump the most dangerous White Supremacist in the world.
Donald Trump belongs on an extremist list.
Why does any of this surprise people? Most of the people that elected Donald knew exactly where he stands. He is more than just a racist. He bullied farmers off of their land in Scotland, to build his golf course, by harassing them 24 / 7 with heavy machinery. He has surrounded himself with hyper-religious theocrats. He doesn't understand how the branches of government function. The list goes on. Basically he was elected as the anti-Obama.
The House Is On Fire – Accepting the Truth of the Trump Revolution
The simpler explanation that accounts for all the available facts is not always right. But as Occam noted, it is always to be preferred. What we need is a Copernican revolution in our understanding of Trumpism, or at least some of us need it. The breakthrough for Copernicus was in positing the unimaginable, indeed the terrifying possibility that the Earth is not the center of the universe but rather a peripheral, secondary celestial body. Once you accept that, a lot falls into place.
With Trump, he has a revanchist racist politics because he is a revanchist racist. Once you accept that, a lot falls into place. All the heroic and increasingly nonsensical perambulations of misunderstandings, inexperience, missed opportunities, stubbornness and all the rest are not needed. It all falls into place.
What we have in this Times article is the more direct evidence, a confirmation of what we should already know. His advisors know this is what he thinks. They apparently hear it frequently. They were shocked to hear him say in public “opinions that the president had long expressed in private.”
The best comment I've heard about Carson is just because you know how to operate on other people's brains doesn't mean you know how to use your own.
White nationalists are flocking to genetic ancestry tests — but don’t like what they find
About a third of the people posting their results were pleased with what they found. "Pretty damn pure blood," said a user with the username Sloth. But the majority didn't find themselves in that situation. Instead, the community often helped them reject the test, or argue with its results.