Trump's Silent Endorsement of White Supremacists

[sharon45]

You are still giving Trump supporters far more credit for honesty and intelligence than they deserve. They will simply point to his "both sides" statements and declare that he did speak out against the neo-nazi white supremacists; and they will insist that we are just hating on Trump by declaring his words inadequate.

His "all sides" statement is going to appeal to and also turn off people from all camps.

The only two groups Trump will NOT speak against: Neo-Nazi/White Supremacists and Putin's regime. But the trumpsters will turn a blind eye to all of it because they voted for him and can't admit they made a mistake.

Again, he has spoken out against both of these at times, just not as much as others may have liked.

 

[abaddon]

I think David Duke has a point. These are the people who elected him, and he can't abandon them now. This he keeps silent. He lets his aides say things he doesn't want to. Many, even Ivanka, have condemned the KKK and neo Nazis. But not Trump. This is just beyond despicable. This is a new low even for him.

He has spoken out against David Duke, just not as much as many would like.

Not as much as is necessary to help tip the scale where the racists feel less emboldened and don't get so aggressive about "taking our country back".

But then Trump is indeed on board with that. Duke's not wrong in his characterization of Trump. It's possible Trump doesn't like the worst of the worst among the people he has attracted and emboldened. But then, that's his typical incapacity for coherent thought, to hope for a moderate sort of racism rather than the inevitably violent sort.

 

[sharon45]

The president’s careful language following attacks by white nationalists also stands in marked contrast to Trump’s unrestrained and blunt condemnations that tend to follow violence carried out by Muslims. In several instances — including the shooting at an Orlando nightclub last summer and the downing of a commercial flight over Egypt in 2015 — Trump tweeted before all the facts were known. On Saturday, he called for a “study” of the violence and its causes.

First of all, this latest event obviously involves many more people, and from stark opinions.

 

[sharon45]

Trump’s political career has been marked with both subtle and not-so-subtle appeals to white racists. He rode to the top of the Republican presidential polls in 2011 in part by embracing the “birther” movement that questioned whether the nation’s first black president was born in the United States. Trump also blew dog whistles at a every opportunity during the 2016 campaign, and attacked a Mexican judge and called to ban all Muslim immigrants to the United States.

Oh, nice objective reporting used here.

 

[laughing dog]

I think David Duke has a point. These are the people who elected him, and he can't abandon them now. This he keeps silent. He lets his aides say things he doesn't want to. Many, even Ivanka, have condemned the KKK and neo Nazis. But not Trump. This is just beyond despicable. This is a new low even for him.

He has spoken out against David Duke, just not as much as many would like.

How could he speak out against David Duke when he claimed he did not even know who he was.

And, he said nothing about that jackass in the last 2 days even though that POS has been on the news thanking Trump.

 

[sharon45]

It is painfully obvious that Trump is blaming the counter protestors as much as the fascists, KKK, and others who stand against everything that this country stands for.

There is no clearly apparent measurement by simply combining all sides.

As has been pointed out many times he is all too happy to name names when he wants to.

Sure, things I think he feels need extra attention, since there are a lot more sympathizers to certain other morally offensive people and issues.

 

[sharon45]

The question now becomes whether things like this will continue. Did this weekend's events embolden hate groups, or to some degree move them back toward the rock they've marched out from under? I say with some firmness that were it not for the deaths that occurred, it would've certainly emboldened them further.

Agreed.

 

[Elixir]

His "all sides" statement is going to appeal to and also turn off people from all camps.

Yeah, the guy is a master of talking out of "all sides" of his mouth at once. In this case (as I have already stated) it's so republicans in congress can say he denounced racist Nazis, and the racist Nazis that comprise the core of his base can say "we have his blessing to keep doing this".

 

[RavenSky]

I think David Duke has a point. These are the people who elected him, and he can't abandon them now. This he keeps silent. He lets his aides say things he doesn't want to. Many, even Ivanka, have condemned the KKK and neo Nazis. But not Trump. This is just beyond despicable. This is a new low even for him.

He has spoken out against David Duke, just not as much as many would like.

He denied knowing him. Not the same thing.

 

[sharon45]

He has spoken out against David Duke, just not as much as many would like.

Not as much as is necessary to help tip the scale where the racists feel less emboldened and don't get so aggressive about "taking our country back".

Yes, it could be easily seen that way; about like what the right-wing saw from Obama's rhetoric.

But then Trump is indeed on board with that. Duke's not wrong in his characterization of Trump. It's possible Trump doesn't like the worst of the worst among the people he has attracted and emboldened. But then, that's his typical incapacity for coherent thought, to hope for a moderate sort of racism rather than the inevitably violent sort.

Whether Trump is honestly supportive or not, what people ought to be afraid of are the stealthy racists; like the ones who have done a pretty good job of keeping different racial communities down for long decades after the Civil Rights bill.

 

[sharon45]

He has spoken out against David Duke, just not as much as many would like.

How could he speak out against David Duke when he claimed he did not even know who he was.

Many people did not understand this, and even I confess to originally missing his point. He means he doesn't know him personally, but he has of course heard of and about him.

And, he said nothing about that jackass in the last 2 days even though that POS has been on the news thanking Trump.

Have you ever heard of the phrase "Don't feed the animals?" Now, I do realize this involves a lot of irony to many people, but it is still a politically savy tactic.

 

[Elixir]

Yes, it could be easily seen that way

Yeah, it can be seen however one would like - again, that's the beauty of talking out of "all sides" of his mouth at once.

Whether Trump is honestly supportive or not

He obviously IS supportive of anyone who will vote for him, regardless of whether or not they are Nazi racists.

ONE THING people ought to be afraid of are the stealthy racists; like the ones who have done a pretty good job of keeping different racial communities down for long decades after the Civil Rights bill.

FIFY. Now it's quite correct. Next question; who are those people? I submit that it includes all those who defended Cheato's initial (yet delayed) mealyu-mouthed condemnation of "all sides".

 

[sharon45]

His "all sides" statement is going to appeal to and also turn off people from all camps.

Yeah, the guy is a master of talking out of "all sides" of his mouth at once. In this case (as I have already stated) it's so republicans in congress can say he denounced racist Nazis, and the racist Nazis that comprise the core of his base can say "we have his blessing to keep doing this".

Hence the businessman and the politician. Both are normally after popularity.

 

[Elixir]

Yeah, the guy is a master of talking out of "all sides" of his mouth at once. In this case (as I have already stated) it's so republicans in congress can say he denounced racist Nazis, and the racist Nazis that comprise the core of his base can say "we have his blessing to keep doing this".

Hence the businessman and the politician. Both are normally after popularity.

WUT? Did you say something, or just pen the first meaningless phrases that came to mind?
I get the distinct impression that you have no position on anything that you'd be willing to try to defend rationally - just an endless number of versions of "yabut".
Can you perhaps provide an example of another "normal" politician who gives overt aid and comfort to Nazi racists while denying he is dong so?

 

[RavenSky]

Here is Trump in 2016 refusing to disavow David Duke:

Trump refused to condemn that endorsement or say he didn't want the support of white supremacists — four times.

"I don't know anything about David Duke. I don't know what you're even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacist. I don't know. I don't know, did he endorse me, or what's going on?" he said. That prompted a back-and-forth that went, in part:

Trump: I don't know what group you're talking about. You wouldn't want me to condemn a group that I know nothing about. ... If you would send me a list of the groups, I will do research on them and certainly I would disavow them if I thought there was something wrong.
Tapper: The Ku Klux Klan?
Trump: You may have groups in there that are totally fine and it would be very unfair. So give me a list of the groups and I'll let you know.
Tapper: I'm just talking about David Duke and the Ku Klux Klan here.
Trump: Honestly, I don't know David Duke.

That's not speaking out against him. That's pretending not to know who David Duke, or even the KKK, is.

 

[Elixir]

Here is Trump in 2016 refusing to disavow David Duke:

Trump refused to condemn that endorsement or say he didn't want the support of white supremacists — four times.

"I don't know anything about David Duke. I don't know what you're even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacist. I don't know. I don't know, did he endorse me, or what's going on?" he said. That prompted a back-and-forth that went, in part:

Trump: I don't know what group you're talking about. You wouldn't want me to condemn a group that I know nothing about. ... If you would send me a list of the groups, I will do research on them and certainly I would disavow them if I thought there was something wrong.
Tapper: The Ku Klux Klan?
Trump: You may have groups in there that are totally fine and it would be very unfair. So give me a list of the groups and I'll let you know.
Tapper: I'm just talking about David Duke and the Ku Klux Klan here.
Trump: Honestly, I don't know David Duke.

That's not speaking out against him. That's pretending not to know who David Duke, or even the KKK, is.

Fifteen years ago, when Trump was flirting with a White House bid as a Reform Party candidate, he named Duke as a cause of concern at least three times.

Trump is a liar and a cheat - always has been, always will be.

 

[sharon45]

Yeah, it can be seen however one would like - again, that's the beauty of talking out of "all sides" of his mouth at once.

Agreed.

Whether Trump is honestly supportive or not

He obviously IS supportive of anyone who will vote for him, regardless of whether or not they are Nazi racists.

Well, I don't see it as blatant as you, but I do of course see a good deal of partisan wiggle room.

ONE THING people ought to be afraid of are the stealthy racists; like the ones who have done a pretty good job of keeping different racial communities down for long decades after the Civil Rights bill.

FIFY. Now it's quite correct. Next question; who are those people?
I submit that it includes all those who defended Cheato's initial (yet delayed) mealyu-mouthed condemnation of "all sides".

This would be best for quite another thread; something that is definitely going to make a lot of diverse people mad.

 

[Elixir]

I do of course see a good deal of partisan wiggle room.

Are you ready to blame the Jews for their 'participation' in concentration camps, too? C'mon girl, exercise that wiggle room!

 

[RavenSky]

I do of course see a good deal of partisan wiggle room.

Are you ready to blame the Jews for their 'participation' in concentration camps, too? C'mon girl, exercise that wiggle room!

She's gonna get splinters in her vajayjay!

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I disagree. While he might very well be a racist I do not think this is evidence.

The thing is, His Flatulence says whatever he thinks his audience wants to hear. Truth or his own feelings have little to do with this. He knows a decent amount of his base is racists, thus he's going to avoid criticizing the racists unless really pushed.

Think of him as a mirror. Is the glass in the mirror beautiful or ugly?

(And don't take this as defending him. Not giving his position is not a desirable attribute in a President. Of course, what we have now is a _president, what are the proper standards??)