3 ms·

Yes, if you imply that Donald trump is guilty of actions those associated with him have taken, you are using guilt by association. It's definitional! I underst

Yes, if you imply that Donald trump is guilty of actions those associated with him have taken, you are using guilt by association. It's definitional! I understand that you feel strongly about this, but it's not illegal to hate someone. If there are people being threatened or harmed, we do have police and the general rule of law to handle those things. It's not like trump runs the government now! Despite emotional currents we are mostly peaceful domestically. Our institutions are still democratic in nature. Trump has to share power with the other pillars of government. We are very, very far from anything resembling naziism. No amount of hatred expressed in speech is equivalent. Action is required.

ubernostrum 10y ago
So... a guy who literally will be in charge of the executive branch, advocating these policies and positions, is fine because we have an executive branch that, um, somehow won't do what he tells them to because it's not like he's really in charge of it? The amount of gymnastics you're trying to do here is amazing. At least the actual Nazis are open about this stuff.
- oldmanjay 10y ago
  I'm not doing any gymnastics. I suspect you believe me to be a trump supporter, but I'm more like a grief counselor helping people like you work through the stages by keeping you grounded in reality.
  - ubernostrum 10y ago
    So, repeating my question: is it "guilt by association" to say that when someone openly and loudly makes the favored policies of racist xenophobes into a centerpiece of his campaign, he's going to end up getting the support and votes of racist xenophobes? Is it unfair to question why he chose to openly and loudly make those policies a centerpiece of his campaign? Is it unfair to ask whether he was courting the votes of the racist xenophobes? If someone loudly campaigned on a promise of, say, amnesty for immigrants who have no criminal record or who were brought here as children, would you call it unfair to conclude that the person was either courting the vote of immigrants and their sympathizers, or was an immigrant or sympathizer? Would you call that "bush league" and "guilt by association"? Or does this standard magically only apply when it's Donald Trump?
    - oldmanjay 10y ago
      I'm not sure I understand you clearly. Are you saying that Donald Trump is guilty because of who supported him, and that's not invoking guilt by association?
      - ubernostrum 10y ago
        I'm saying that given the direct, plain and obvious connection between the policies he advocated for, and the groups who supported him, it is reasonable to ask whether it was his intent to court the support of those groups. I notice you also haven't answered my question: does your sudden intense desire to pick apart any argument I make apply to all arguments, or only -- by complete coincidence -- to arguments made with respect to Donald Trump?
        oldmanjay 10y ago
        I have no intense desire. I'm simply bored on the internet and long ago accepted that trump had the election in hand. I also have no obligation to detail to you which arguments I challenge. Sorry.

ubernostrum 10y ago

So... a guy who literally will be in charge of the executive branch, advocating these policies and positions, is fine because we have an executive branch that, um, somehow won't do what he tells them to because it's not like he's really in charge of it? The amount of gymnastics you're trying to do here is amazing. At least the actual Nazis are open about this stuff.

oldmanjay 10y ago
I'm not doing any gymnastics. I suspect you believe me to be a trump supporter, but I'm more like a grief counselor helping people like you work through the stages by keeping you grounded in reality.
- ubernostrum 10y ago
  So, repeating my question: is it "guilt by association" to say that when someone openly and loudly makes the favored policies of racist xenophobes into a centerpiece of his campaign, he's going to end up getting the support and votes of racist xenophobes? Is it unfair to question why he chose to openly and loudly make those policies a centerpiece of his campaign? Is it unfair to ask whether he was courting the votes of the racist xenophobes? If someone loudly campaigned on a promise of, say, amnesty for immigrants who have no criminal record or who were brought here as children, would you call it unfair to conclude that the person was either courting the vote of immigrants and their sympathizers, or was an immigrant or sympathizer? Would you call that "bush league" and "guilt by association"? Or does this standard magically only apply when it's Donald Trump?
  - oldmanjay 10y ago
    I'm not sure I understand you clearly. Are you saying that Donald Trump is guilty because of who supported him, and that's not invoking guilt by association?
    - ubernostrum 10y ago
      I'm saying that given the direct, plain and obvious connection between the policies he advocated for, and the groups who supported him, it is reasonable to ask whether it was his intent to court the support of those groups. I notice you also haven't answered my question: does your sudden intense desire to pick apart any argument I make apply to all arguments, or only -- by complete coincidence -- to arguments made with respect to Donald Trump?
      - oldmanjay 10y ago
        I have no intense desire. I'm simply bored on the internet and long ago accepted that trump had the election in hand. I also have no obligation to detail to you which arguments I challenge. Sorry.