Trump and his nicknames

[phil3]

They fired on Sumter.

Wow was this last week?

 

[Maximus1]

It is reasonable to observe this:
Why hire Steven Miller and Steve Bannon? Give Bannon the closest office to the president’s in the WH( ALWAYS A SYMBOL).
Bannons words, not mine, " Breitbart is the platform of the ALT-RIGHT. A term that is interchanged with nationalism and white Nationalism.
Why the prominence of such men?
Birther. Attacking legitimacy.
Why the prominence?

 

[pnewton]

They’re pretty much all just disagreements that the totalitarian-minded left

Some are just disagreements, like with the way you used the word “totalitarian”. That is a hoot! LOL

You here we are discussing Trump calling people names, but you find it fine that clinton called 50% of Trump voters “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic – Islamophobic” oh and BTW, they next day she retracted the 50% inferring a 100% of them.

That was disgusting and bigoted of her. I do not if that came from her bitterness, or some writer, but it was terribly demeaning of half the country. She never understood, like so many Democrats, that good people of morals simply cannot abide abortion. She was not exactly the presidential type herself, though here rhetoric lacked the grade-school pettiness found in Trump’s name-calling.

maybe .000000000000000000000000000000000000001% of Trump supports “feel” this way.

Somewhere a math teacher roles over in his grave.

I know that sometimes political speech crosses the line into insults. I think it is the childish nature of the insults that bothers most people.

 

[Maximus1]

Well my question is where did they go. Because clearly they were there.
Some minds changed but certainly not all.
Next
I won’t compare her to Trump and I certainly won’t give Trump a pass because of anything about her.
That idea is the Trump defense of WHATABOUTISM. IT is an excuse

 

[Maximus1]

It bothers me that she said it. Her job is to form a more perfect Union. That’s a hard job.
Trump has not even tried I my opinion. Not in any real way. He uses it to his advantage, and that remains the biggest criticism of him. He is a self centered president

 

[dvdjs]

You here we are discussing Trump calling people names, butyou find it fine that clinton called 50% of Trump voters “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic – Islamophobic” oh and BTW, they next day she retracted the 50% inferring a 100% of them.

Now you have shifted from name-calling to numerical estimates.
She did not make a claim to two significant figures. She said “half”. And when questioned about it, revised the estimate downward, not upward to 100%. That is the only interpretation compatible with her remarks which were aimed at having her supporters better understand and reach out to the reachable among those in the Trump camp. Did you ever look at the whole statement?

What do you think is the correct number?
One Trump fan who frequently posts here says that everyone is racist. I don’t buy that.
But what fraction of Americans, do you think show evidence of racism, sexism, xenophobia, Islamophobia, or homophobia?

Like I said, the left not only hates Trump but his supporters.

These, of course, are your thoughts about the ™left. I think that you are wrong on all counts. Trump opponents see him as a danger to the nation, and want him out of office. And they want to appeal to whatever fraction of his present supporters that they might reach to help in that effrot. That, IMO, is why the Trump fans like to spin words like “deplorables” nto an attack on all Trump supporters: to stiffen the resistance to any outreach.

 

[Maximus1]

That was very well said.

 

[PetraG]

maybe .000000000000000000000000000000000000001% of Trump supports “feel” this way. Clinton nor you have any real proof.

That’s a lot of zeros.
1 citizen in the entire country would be 0.000000003.
1 person on the planet would be 0.00000000013.
Let’s just say that because of the protections on our free speech we know the numbers are substantially higher than that.

Why? Well, he said these things, and it got him elected:
When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.

I have heard him make comments like the one above, full of demonstrably false prejudices against Mexican immigrants–and I’m including the ones who are unquestionably breaking our immigration laws. Do you think that people who believe the same thing wouldn’t be more likely to vote for Donald Trump than for candidates who won’t say things like that? Who do you think they vote for? Why do you think he believes that comments like that will increase his popularity? He obviously does think that someone will be pleased to hear it. Well, if he can count on the fraction that don’t like it to look the other way while he panders to people with hateful attitudes that no one else want to openly try to attract, what is the down side for him in currying favor with people who have hateful attitudes? There isn’t one. Honestly, there is the attitude, “Hey, what is one gunshot wound on 5th Avenue compared to stopping lots of abortions?” That is an attitude that ignores the truth that pursing an important end does not justify any means.

This is what happens when people who support him for one reason, even very praiseworthy reasons, are willing to remain silent when he curries favor with those who do have hateful attitudes.

Lie down with the dogs, you get up with fleas.

 

[Jeanne_S]

I thinks President Trump clearly cares about this a Nation,its well being and that of the electorate. He has the abailty to actually connect with “ the people” This I think comes from being in the business world.He is results oriented and very pragmatic in his way of governing.
He is accused of being impulsive etc.He has shown amazing restraint and focus in light of all the distractions surrounding him.
I have said from the start I voted for him with som trepidation but he has surprised me at how effective a leader he has shown himself to be. Sure his persona can be off putting,I can overlook it because of his actions as the POTUS

 

[phil3]

What do you think is the correct number?
One Trump fan who frequently posts here says that everyone is racist. I don’t buy that.
But what fraction of Americans, do you think show evidence of racism, sexism, xenophobia, Islamophobia, or homophobia?

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.) phil3:

less than 1/100%

 

[phil3]

Trump is going to win in a landslide in 2020

 

[PetraG]

He is accused of being impulsive etc.He has shown amazing restraint and focus in light of all the distractions surrounding him.

By what measure has he shown amazing restraint? If he’s watching cable news and who’s tweeting what, those aren’t distractions falling onto his desk. I’m sorry, I can’t think of a way to describe him as showing a particular amount of restraint, other than saying he makes wild threats and doesn’t follow through on them. I wouldn’t count that as “restrained,” though. And what else did he promise before election that he’d do? Oh, be “more presidential.” Yeah, that hasn’t happened for longer than, I don’t know, maybe 36 hours? (I mean the days on which he actually issues communications.)

Sure his persona can be off putting,I can overlook it because of his actions as the POTUS

His person is something I can’t know. His family seem to genuinely like him and many of his employees seem to think he’s a good boss, so he can’t be as bombastic in person as he is on Twitter all of the time.
I think he needs to get a lot fewer “overlook” mulligans on the way he attacks people. He’s not going to give up on the pro-life movement because they boo him when he’s mean to people. He’s not going to give up on border security because his supporters insist that he not make up “facts” out of thin air. You’d think that’s the concern, the way people defend him, but it isn’t going to happen.
They don’t have to stop voting for him. They just need to say, “Hey, we vote for you, and you’re embarrassing us. You’re putting us in a bad light. That isn’t the way we talk and it isn’t talk we want to have to defend. Cut it out.”
He does care about more than votes. He cares about whether people praise him. When he does things that are definitely not praiseworthy, silence doesn’t register with him as criticism. He counts those who are silent as being in agreement with what he does.

 

[dvdjs]

less than 1/100%

I note the lack of justification for this estimate. I think it is way off. But I suspect that we probably disagree on what constitutes acts of racism, sexism, xenophobia, Islamophobia and homophobia. It is probably better to agree on that first.

 

[PetraG]

Bannons words, not mine, " Breitbart is the platform of the ALT-RIGHT. A term that is interchanged with nationalism and white Nationalism.
Why the prominence of such men?
Birther. Attacking legitimacy.
Why the prominence?

Because it doesn’t cost him votes from people who support him for other reasons.
It is always, “well, I don’t like it when he does that, but…” I hear it over and over: that is, some who revel that he “tells it like it is” and others who don’t make a peep when what he’s telling is mean-spirited and even false.
He’s getting to have his cake and eat it, too.
In the end, it is going to be those who disagree with the way he talks but who never criticized him and only made excuses who are going to pay the tab. They’re burning through their integrity as if it was a pile of fake $100 bills. That’s the impression, too: that is, if the integrity were real, they wouldn’t give it up so cheaply.
I know better, because I know those who have this idea that they have to bite their tongues to save unborn babies. The problem is, that’s not true. The capital “r” Right does not need to collaborate with nastiness in order to win out. It is quite the opposite. There are ways to object other than withholding a vote, and they are ways that Donald Trump cares about. If he had to tone it down to be praiseworthy, he would. As it is, though, that hasn’t been necessary.

 

[phil3]

Thinking about it, she identified personality traits of others.

Then maybe Trump should call them

Plagiarizer Joe Biden
Fake Indian to get jobs real indians deserved (Elizabeth Warren)
special interest Ted Cruz (in full disclosure I voted for him in the TN primary)
Cant win seat in 2016 Senator Jeff Flake
Uses her House power to enrich herself Nancy Pelosi
pay for Play Hillary.

 

[dvdjs]

but it was terribly demeaning of half the country.

Not to half the country. To about 10% of the country. And it is only demeaning if it untrue.

 

[phil3]

You asked me what I thought was the correct amount.

Youre correct, so you start as to what constitues

racism, sexism, xenophobia, Islamophobia and homophobia

 

[Maximus1]

You are entitled to your opinion. I think he is cruel and a bit sadistic by nature and is an extreme narcissist and it affects everything he does. He understands certain transactions are necessary to maintain his 40-45%, but his negatives of 53% with a relatively good economy shows me I have a lot of company

 

[PetraG]

Not to half the country. To about 10% of the country. And it is only demeaning if it untrue.

a) She did use the estimate of roughly half, not 10%
b) To the topic of this thread: name-calling is demeaning. Saying that behavior is deplorable, or being caught up in false beliefs is deplorable or pushing hateful attitudes is deplorable is one thing. That is not what we’re talking about here.

Calling people “deplorables” is demeaning. It is an arrogant, dismissive and uncharitable thing to say. It doesn’t matter if Donald Trump says it or Hillary Clinton says it. It doesn’t even matter if we’re talking about friends or enemies! These are human beings. Our Lord died for their salvation. Our Lord died for us, even when we were still sinners. (Rom 5:8) We have no business calling anybody else a “deplorable.” No one.

 

[dvdjs]

a) She did use the estimate of roughly half, not 10%

Half of Trump supporters.
Trump had about 63 million voters. Half of that is about 10% of the country.
He may have had more supporters than voters, but that is conjectural.

Calling people “deplorables” is demeaning.

I don’t disagree. However, in fairness, the comment was tightly and immediately defined by behavior that I think most folk find deplorable. Second, in contrast to the spin, the context of the remarks was to tell supporters that these characteristics do not define all Trump supporters. That there are many with other reasons for supporting Trump and that they should be received and included with empathy and understanding. That aspect of her remarks is deliberately omitted by most everyone who partially quotes from them. Such an odd omission, especially when made in the context of treating people fairly.

But the “other” basket – the other basket – and I know because I look at this crowd I see friends from all over America here: I see friends from Florida and Georgia and South Carolina and Texas and — as well as, you know, New York and California — but that “other” basket of people are people who feel the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures; and they’re just desperate for change. It doesn’t really even matter where it comes from. They don’t buy everything he says, but — he seems to hold out some hope that their lives will be different. They won’t wake up and see their jobs disappear, lose a kid to heroin, feel like they’re in a dead-end. Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well.