4 ms·

> not getting behind gay marriage until a couple years ago And when did Trump get behind gay marriage? How is that a point against Hillary? > saying stuff lik

by hamax 10y ago

> not getting behind gay marriage until a couple years ago And when did Trump get behind gay marriage? How is that a point against Hillary? > saying stuff like blacks are superpredators Thank god she never said that.

hga 10y ago
The Internet never forgets: https://www.google.com/search?q=hillary+blacks+superpredators https://www.google.com/search?q=hillary+blacks+superpredator...
- hamax 10y ago
  Please, go find me the exact quote. This is the kind of fake news the whole Trump campaign was built on. Calling violent gangs super-predators is not the same as calling blacks super-predators. Not even a bit.
  - aaron-lebo 10y ago
    And if she was referring to gangs of minority kids (as she was in context) is it at least a bit like it? "But we also have to have an organized effort against gangs," Hillary Clinton said in a C-SPAN video clip. "Just as in a previous generation we had an organized effort against the mob. We need to take these people on. They are often connected to big drug cartels, they are not just gangs of kids anymore. They are often the kinds of kids that are called superpredators — no conscience, no empathy. We can talk about why they ended up that way, but first, we have to bring them to heel." Bernie seemed to think so: When Sanders was asked by debate moderator why he called out Bill Clinton out for his defense of Clinton’s use of the term "superpredator," Sanders responded, "Because it was a racist term, and everyone knew it was a racist term."
    - hamax 10y ago
      If she would call nazis super predators no one would imply she's bigoted against whites. To be fair. I agree she could and should have used better phrasing. I can also understand people like Sanders for criticise her. Maybe she even was bigoted 20 years age when she said that, or maybe she still is. But you have to interpret her words extremely uncharitably to infer that. Here we are trying to figure out if here comments about gangs could be problematic while comparing her to Trump, who said this about mexican immigrants, not just mexican gangs: "They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people!".
      - DefaultUserHN 10y ago
        >"They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people!". The stats said that 1 in 4 women who cross the border illegally were raped. Trump was talking about the rapists, not all Mexican. He said some Mexicans are good. Some are criminals. And some are rapists. There is nothing racist about this.
      - Torgo 10y ago
        A bunch of black people are saying "this is racist" so step one is taking what they say seriously and considering their point of view. Beyond that: for many people, youth or juvenile crime is considered a failure by society, and lamented. Kids were neglected, went wrong, and we lost them to crime. When the issue is black youth crime however, their identity is pathologized and the perpetrators are subject to dehumanization through terms. "superpredator": these black youths aren't like Johnny shoplifting a comic book from Walgreens, they are inhuman killing machines that prey on the rest of us. "bring them to heel" this is something you make a dog do. An out of control mad dog, who needs to be corrected through force. I don't think Clinton _meant_ it to be racist. Believe it or not I don't think Trump did either. But I'd say both of them said racist things in the sense that they both fell into patterns that denigrate and otherize minorities.
  - basseq 10y ago
    First google result contains it: "But we also have to have an organized effort against gangs," Hillary Clinton said in a C-SPAN video clip. "Just as in a previous generation we had an organized effort against the mob. We need to take these people on. They are often connected to big drug cartels, they are not just gangs of kids anymore. They are often the kinds of kids that are called superpredators — no conscience, no empathy. We can talk about why they ended up that way, but first, we have to bring them to heel." So, no, it's a twisting of words. But not limited to the Trump campaign. Trump didn't call all Mexicans rapists, either.
    - hamax 10y ago
      But he did say that about immigrants. Or maybe illegal immigrants if you want to specially charitable. If he would said that about mexican gangs people would be less angry about it.
      - DefaultUserHN 10y ago
        The stats said that 1 in 4 women who cross the border illegal were raped. Trump was talking about those rapists, not all Mexicans.
        basseq 10y ago
        You can argue semantics of the full quote, but the only way you get to, "Trump called all Mexicans rapists" is: a) ignoring the context of the remarks being on illegal immigration, b) implying examples apply to the entire population, and c) ignoring the remainder of his remarks. When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. [...] 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. If you want to argue pure semantics, you have to be concerned that Trump thinks Mexico is sending people, you should be confused about how "they" bring problems "with us", and stuck in a moral quandary about how all Mexicans in the U.S. are drug-toting criminal rapists who are also good people (maybe). You could never get to "all Mexicans" unless Mexico is "sending" 100% of its population. Or, you interpret the remarks to mean that illegal Mexican immigrants are more likely to be drug-users, criminals, and rapists, with the immediate and explicit caveat that this charge does not imply to all illegal Mexican immigrants, because at least "some" of them are good people.
  - throwaway98764 10y ago
    This good enough for you? https://youtu.be/8k4nmRZx9nc?t=42 https://youtu.be/8k4nmRZx9nc?t=42
umanwizard 10y ago
Do you have evidence that Trump was ever against gay marriage? I don't remember him saying much on the issue.
- hamax 10y ago
  It's a bit tricky, I agree. Like with most of his positions. During the campaign he said that he's against the supreme court ruling since it should be decided by the state. He also said in an interview that he is for "traditional marriage". It could be worse, except that he has a VP who is a huge opponent of LGBT rights.
  - chris11 10y ago
    Trump has publicly said he will appoint judges who will overturn Roe v Wade. I expect that if he goes through with that gay marriage will also be attacked.
    - akiselev 10y ago
      They will certainly be attacked but unless conservatives get a sixth seat in the court, they are unlikely to succeed. Justices are political appointees so there is some selection for values at play but they take their jobs seriously and vote across partisan lines much more often than our politicians. Justice Kennedy, the conservative swing vote, has been supportive of restrictions on abortion but he has explicitly said that he prefers to defend the precedent Roe v Wade set. He even wrote the majority opinion in support of marriage equality. Even in controversial decisions like Citizens United where I vehemently disagree with him, I have to admit that he seems like a dedicated constitutional scholar that believes in preserving the integrity of the institution of the Supreme Court and the US constitution. His opinions are well thought out, are based on a balanced view of strict and loose interpretation of the constitution, and he takes his role as a bipartisan seriously so I think we still have a reliable firewall in the court.
- aaron-lebo 10y ago
  Pence is rather anti-lgbt. But you have to ask yourself whether any other Republican candidate would have an open homosexual (Thiel) on the stage at the RNC and whether they'd be caught dead doing this: https://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2016/10/carlo-allegri-donald-trump-lgbt-flag-2016-presidential-election.jpg?quality=80&strip=all&w=3698 https://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2016/10/carlo-allegri-don...

by hamax 10y ago

hga 10y ago

The Internet never forgets: https://www.google.com/search?q=hillary+blacks+superpredators https://www.google.com/search?q=hillary+blacks+superpredator...

hamax 10y ago
Please, go find me the exact quote. This is the kind of fake news the whole Trump campaign was built on. Calling violent gangs super-predators is not the same as calling blacks super-predators. Not even a bit.
- aaron-lebo 10y ago
  And if she was referring to gangs of minority kids (as she was in context) is it at least a bit like it? "But we also have to have an organized effort against gangs," Hillary Clinton said in a C-SPAN video clip. "Just as in a previous generation we had an organized effort against the mob. We need to take these people on. They are often connected to big drug cartels, they are not just gangs of kids anymore. They are often the kinds of kids that are called superpredators — no conscience, no empathy. We can talk about why they ended up that way, but first, we have to bring them to heel." Bernie seemed to think so: When Sanders was asked by debate moderator why he called out Bill Clinton out for his defense of Clinton’s use of the term "superpredator," Sanders responded, "Because it was a racist term, and everyone knew it was a racist term."
  - hamax 10y ago
    If she would call nazis super predators no one would imply she's bigoted against whites. To be fair. I agree she could and should have used better phrasing. I can also understand people like Sanders for criticise her. Maybe she even was bigoted 20 years age when she said that, or maybe she still is. But you have to interpret her words extremely uncharitably to infer that. Here we are trying to figure out if here comments about gangs could be problematic while comparing her to Trump, who said this about mexican immigrants, not just mexican gangs: "They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people!".
    - DefaultUserHN 10y ago
      >"They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people!". The stats said that 1 in 4 women who cross the border illegally were raped. Trump was talking about the rapists, not all Mexican. He said some Mexicans are good. Some are criminals. And some are rapists. There is nothing racist about this.
    - Torgo 10y ago
      A bunch of black people are saying "this is racist" so step one is taking what they say seriously and considering their point of view. Beyond that: for many people, youth or juvenile crime is considered a failure by society, and lamented. Kids were neglected, went wrong, and we lost them to crime. When the issue is black youth crime however, their identity is pathologized and the perpetrators are subject to dehumanization through terms. "superpredator": these black youths aren't like Johnny shoplifting a comic book from Walgreens, they are inhuman killing machines that prey on the rest of us. "bring them to heel" this is something you make a dog do. An out of control mad dog, who needs to be corrected through force. I don't think Clinton _meant_ it to be racist. Believe it or not I don't think Trump did either. But I'd say both of them said racist things in the sense that they both fell into patterns that denigrate and otherize minorities.
- basseq 10y ago
  First google result contains it: "But we also have to have an organized effort against gangs," Hillary Clinton said in a C-SPAN video clip. "Just as in a previous generation we had an organized effort against the mob. We need to take these people on. They are often connected to big drug cartels, they are not just gangs of kids anymore. They are often the kinds of kids that are called superpredators — no conscience, no empathy. We can talk about why they ended up that way, but first, we have to bring them to heel." So, no, it's a twisting of words. But not limited to the Trump campaign. Trump didn't call all Mexicans rapists, either.
  - hamax 10y ago
    But he did say that about immigrants. Or maybe illegal immigrants if you want to specially charitable. If he would said that about mexican gangs people would be less angry about it.
    - DefaultUserHN 10y ago
      The stats said that 1 in 4 women who cross the border illegal were raped. Trump was talking about those rapists, not all Mexicans.
      - basseq 10y ago
        You can argue semantics of the full quote, but the only way you get to, "Trump called all Mexicans rapists" is: a) ignoring the context of the remarks being on illegal immigration, b) implying examples apply to the entire population, and c) ignoring the remainder of his remarks. When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. [...] 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. If you want to argue pure semantics, you have to be concerned that Trump thinks Mexico is sending people, you should be confused about how "they" bring problems "with us", and stuck in a moral quandary about how all Mexicans in the U.S. are drug-toting criminal rapists who are also good people (maybe). You could never get to "all Mexicans" unless Mexico is "sending" 100% of its population. Or, you interpret the remarks to mean that illegal Mexican immigrants are more likely to be drug-users, criminals, and rapists, with the immediate and explicit caveat that this charge does not imply to all illegal Mexican immigrants, because at least "some" of them are good people.
- throwaway98764 10y ago
  This good enough for you? https://youtu.be/8k4nmRZx9nc?t=42 https://youtu.be/8k4nmRZx9nc?t=42

umanwizard 10y ago

Do you have evidence that Trump was ever against gay marriage? I don't remember him saying much on the issue.

hamax 10y ago
It's a bit tricky, I agree. Like with most of his positions. During the campaign he said that he's against the supreme court ruling since it should be decided by the state. He also said in an interview that he is for "traditional marriage". It could be worse, except that he has a VP who is a huge opponent of LGBT rights.
- chris11 10y ago
  Trump has publicly said he will appoint judges who will overturn Roe v Wade. I expect that if he goes through with that gay marriage will also be attacked.
  - akiselev 10y ago
    They will certainly be attacked but unless conservatives get a sixth seat in the court, they are unlikely to succeed. Justices are political appointees so there is some selection for values at play but they take their jobs seriously and vote across partisan lines much more often than our politicians. Justice Kennedy, the conservative swing vote, has been supportive of restrictions on abortion but he has explicitly said that he prefers to defend the precedent Roe v Wade set. He even wrote the majority opinion in support of marriage equality. Even in controversial decisions like Citizens United where I vehemently disagree with him, I have to admit that he seems like a dedicated constitutional scholar that believes in preserving the integrity of the institution of the Supreme Court and the US constitution. His opinions are well thought out, are based on a balanced view of strict and loose interpretation of the constitution, and he takes his role as a bipartisan seriously so I think we still have a reliable firewall in the court.
aaron-lebo 10y ago
Pence is rather anti-lgbt. But you have to ask yourself whether any other Republican candidate would have an open homosexual (Thiel) on the stage at the RNC and whether they'd be caught dead doing this: https://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2016/10/carlo-allegri-donald-trump-lgbt-flag-2016-presidential-election.jpg?quality=80&strip=all&w=3698 https://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2016/10/carlo-allegri-don...