Trump exposed

[Sparko]

The point is that Trump maliciously calls it ‘chinese’ to deflect accountability for this ongoing crisis and hope there are people that are naive or simple enough to actually believe that China is to blame for everything bad that’s currently happening in the US as a result of this pandemic. It’s these idiots that then go out and assault asians believing they are to blame for this current state.

Trump didn’t cross out ‘corona’ in his speech and replace it with ‘China’ because people needed to know where it originated from. It’s clearly become a malicious term which is why most people have stopped calling it that and the people that still call it that know exactly why they do it.

The press called it the Wuhan and China virus before Trump did. Trump isn't trying to harm people, he is trying to blame the country of China for their actions. That is why he keeps calling the the China virus.

People who would harm Asians because of the origin of this virus, already know that it came from China. They would harm Asians no matter what Trump says. To try to blame Trump for their actions is idiotic.

[DivineOb]

I'm not. Just explaining to the fruit what one is.

"To the fruit"? What does that mean? That I'm gay? :).

I guess you accept my definition of a large portion.

[Bill the Cat]

"To the fruit"? What does that mean? That I'm gay? :).

No. It means I was just tossing out the definition to the air.

I guess you accept my definition of a large portion.

You didn't define it. You insinuated that it affected voter action.

[DivineOb]

You didn't define it. You insinuated that it affected voter action.

I'm saying that however high the number is, it's large enough that Trump's racist statements don't hurt him with his base. Why do we need a more specific definition for this discussion? How would I know the actual number of people?

I assume you would stand behind the statement that "Biden supporters are 'pro gay'." Do we need a number or just the knowledge that his pro-gay stance gains him votes and switching to an anti-gay stance would cost him votes?

[Whateverman]

Then you WOULD object to the blame assigned by the term.

Right.

The virus didn't come from China. It came from the capital of Wuhan, Hubei province - the more accurate location.

That's not even the same thing!!

You asked "Since when is naming something "assigning blame"?"

You then objected to the term "Christian KKK", which means you recognize that naming something can assign blame.

Wuhan IS a part of China.

It's not China, though, is it?

China IS a part of the Asian continent, so why not call it the Asian Virus?

[Whateverman]

See my post immediately above.

I already responded to that list, earlier in this thread IIRC.

Most of the items in the list are harmless, and not examples of what's happening when people call COVID-19 the Chinese flu (virus, pandemic, whatever). Labeling an outbreak for the specific location it emerged from is perfectly fine.

"China" is not a specific location.

It's a nationalist dog-whistle.

[Bill the Cat]

I'm saying that however high the number is, it's large enough that Trump's racist statements don't hurt him with his base.

Or maybe they don't agree with the label...

Why do we need a more specific definition for this discussion? How would I know the actual number of people?

Because it is important to know just how racist you on the left think Trump's base is. It helps pretenses get dropped.

I assume you would stand behind the statement that "Biden supporters are 'pro gay'." Do we need a number or just the knowledge that his pro-gay stance gains him votes and switching to an anti-gay stance would cost him votes?

Sure. But again, I think it's safer to say that a vast majority of Biden supporters are pro-gay while only a tiny fraction of Trump supporters are actually racist.

[DivineOb]

Or maybe they don't agree with the label...

Most racists don't. So what? Many Trumpers are just ignorant. Most are complicit.

Because it is important to know just how racist you on the left think Trump's base is. It helps pretenses get dropped.

First of all, I only speak for myself.

Second, they are racist enough that they let his overt racism and the overt racism of a core of his supporters go! You do the math for yourself.

In theory I support the beliefs of Antifa. But I would need to get the bottom on their true propensity for unprovoked acts of violence before I would be comfortable calling myself a member. It wouldn't be enough to say "Well, I don't support them on that but look at the rest of the stuff."

Sure. But again, I think it's safer to say that a vast majority of Biden supporters are pro-gay while only a tiny fraction of Trump supporters are actually racist.

Again, if his overt racism and the overt racism of a small core of Trump's supporters doesn't cost him votes then it paints Trump supporters in a bad light and show most of them to be purely transactional in their politics and beliefs. This isn't an issue where one can say "I don't agree with him on this but look at all those judges." This is a direct assault on the message of Jesus's teachings, a direct assault on the principles most Trumpers claim to hold, and a direct assault on the Constitution and values of true Americans.

I'm sorry you don't like getting caught up in that net. Jesus calls on you to oppose injustice wherever it exists so take it up with him. Opposing evil is rarely convenient.

[Bill the Cat]

Most racists don't. So what? Many Trumpers are just ignorant. Most are complicit.

And most on the left distort and twist his words in the least charitable way possible. And most of us on the right actually know that you do it.

First of all, I only speak for myself.

Second, they are racist enough that they let his overt racism and the overt racism of a core of his supporters go! You do the math for yourself.

And I think you intentionally make this "overt racism" up.

In theory I support the beliefs of Antifa. But I would need to get the bottom on their true propensity for unprovoked acts of violence before I would be comfortable calling myself a member. It wouldn't be enough to say "Well, I don't support them on that but look at the rest of the stuff."

They are too unorganized to have "beliefs". Other than thinking they are all Guy Fawkes mask wearing V for Vendetta stars.

Again, if his overt racism and the overt racism of a small core of Trump's supporters doesn't cost him votes then it paints Trump supporters in a bad light and show most of them to be purely transactional in their politics and beliefs. This isn't an issue where one can say "I don't agree with him on this but look at all those judges." This is a direct assault on the message of Jesus's teachings, a direct assault on the principles most Trumpers claim to hold, and a direct assault on the Constitution and values of true Americans.

You're wrong on almost every one of those claims. Jesus never told us anything about supporting political leaders, other than pay your taxes and pray for those in charge of the government. There is no "overt racism" with Trump. He may say stupid things on occasion, but that isn't overt racism. And only interpreting every action through a racism hunter's lens can you POSSIBLY believe that.

I'm sorry you don't like getting caught up in that net. Jesus calls on you to oppose injustice wherever it exists so take it up with him. Opposing evil is rarely convenient.

Injustice to who?

[DivineOb]

And most on the left distort and twist his words in the least charitable way possible. And most of us on the right actually know that you do it.

How many instances of overt racism would it take for your to admit that he has said racist things?

And I think you intentionally make this "overt racism" up.

Let's find out then. Give me a number and I'll see what I can do.

You're wrong on almost every one of those claims. Jesus never told us anything about supporting political leaders, other than pay your taxes and pray for those in charge of the government.

I never said anything about supporting political leaders. I'm speaking about *opposing* those who use racism to achieve political ends. How do you interpret Matthew Chapter 25 in light of political leaders using racism for political ends?

There is no "overt racism" with Trump. He may say stupid things on occasion, but that isn't overt racism. And only interpreting every action through a racism hunter's lens can you POSSIBLY believe that.

I don't interpret everything he does through a lens geared towards seeing racism. But I have to interpret everything he says in light of what he says at his worst.

Injustice to who?

Are you saying Jesus doesn't call you to oppose injustice directed towards *everyone*, particularly those who are without the means to protect themselves?

I mean, I wasn't a great Christian but I paid enough attention on Sunday to hear that message now and again.

[Whateverman]

most on the left distort and twist his words in the least charitable way possible.

Be honest: you know he's a troll, and you like him because of this.

No one accuses critics of trolls of distorting and twisting the troll's words, because everyone recognizes what the troll is trying to do. Trump is different, in that his supporters know he's a troll - enjoy it - and pretend that he's just speaking like a normal president. He isn't, and he never has spoken like a normal president - which is why you voted for him.

Y'all give everything he says a pass, and focus instead on the reactions his statements get. Everyone in this forum knows that if Obama had said 5% of the things Trump has said, federal buildings would have been fire-bombed.

[Bill the Cat]

How many instances of overt racism would it take for your to admit that he has said racist things?

He has said things that you lefties contort to claim racism. Or things that were stupid choices of phrase.

Let's find out then. Give me a number and I'll see what I can do.

Nah, it's an exercise in futility. You have a lens that sees whatever he says in the worst light, and I don't have the time to correct you.

I never said anything about supporting political leaders. I'm speaking about *opposing* those who use racism to achieve political ends. How do you interpret Matthew Chapter 25 in light of political leaders using racism for political ends?

Which part?

I don't interpret everything he does through a lens geared towards seeing racism. But I have to interpret everything he says in light of what he says at his worst.

Riiiight...

Are you saying Jesus doesn't call you to oppose injustice directed towards *everyone*, particularly those who are without the means to protect themselves?

I mean, I wasn't a great Christian but I paid enough attention on Sunday to hear that message now and again.

No, I am asking who is defining if something is an injustice.

[Bill the Cat]

Be honest: you know he's a troll, and you like him because of this.

No one accuses critics of trolls of distorting and twisting the troll's words, because everyone recognizes what the troll is trying to do. Trump is different, in that his supporters know he's a troll - enjoy it - and pretend that he's just speaking like a normal president. He isn't, and he never has spoken like a normal president - which is why you voted for him.

Y'all give everything he says a pass, and focus instead on the reactions his statements get. Everyone in this forum knows that if Obama had said 5% of the things Trump has said, federal buildings would have been fire-bombed.

Man, you guys would have hated Jefferson...

[Sparko]

Who says it is racist only for this disease? I sure don't.

Read his post.

[DivineOb]

He has said things that you lefties contort to claim racism. Or things that were stupid choices of phrase.

So you don't think there is a single unambiguous racist comment Trump has made?

Nah, it's an exercise in futility. You have a lens that sees whatever he says in the worst light, and I don't have the time to correct you.

Coward :).

Which part?

The part about doing for the least. You could probably also take the beatitudes similarly.

Riiiight...

Then embarrass me. If I am mistaken about my beliefs I'd rather be shown to be wrong than to carry on with incorrect beliefs.

No, I am asking who is defining if something is an injustice.

It is an injustice for anyone to be discriminated against for their race. It is an injustice for perpetuate beliefs which lead to discriminating against someone for their race. Do I really have to explain that to you?