7 ms·

Show me where Trump is racist. Show me just one example.

cr0sh 10y ago
I googled "trump racist comments" - and got a slew of articles. Here is but one from Fortune: http://fortune.com/2016/06/07/donald-trump-racism-quotes/ http://fortune.com/2016/06/07/donald-trump-racism-quotes/ "A well-educated black has a tremendous advantage" "Black guys counting my money! I hate it" "Least racist person on earth" There's three. You can find more. As far as the last one, one might argue "How is that racist?" Guess what - when you aren't racist, you don't need to declare it. Plus - that comment technically suggests that at a minimum, he admits that he's possibly just "a little" racist...
- SnowFace 10y ago
  > "A well-educated black has a tremendous advantage" How is that racist? Isn't that the point of affirmative action? > "Black guys counting my money! I hate it" Says a guy that Trump fired. I'm skeptical, to say the least. > "Least racist person on earth" Doesn't sound very racist to me. > Guess what - when you aren't racist, you don't need to declare it. When you're constantly called a racist, then yes, you do need to declare it. > Plus - that comment technically suggests that at a minimum, he admits that he's possibly just "a little" racist... It doesn't, and this is playing word games. His communication style is to talk in extremes, and I'm sure he would have said "I'm the hugest non-racist there is" if it had the same ring to it. Any more examples?
freen 10y ago
Lost federal racial discrimination lawsuit. http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/855553 http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/855553
- Uhhrrr 10y ago
  Correction: Settled a federal racial discrimination lawsuit.
  - freen 10y ago
    I guess Trump didn't have a strong case. I wonder why?
    - Uhhrrr 10y ago
      The counterparty was the Department of Justice.
- SnowFace 10y ago
  He settled the case, not lost. He also was never accused of discrimination himself, by anybody. Others were. He was the new President of his father's business in an era of witchhunts, and he got dragged into it, but if you look at his actions since then, like desegregating Mar-A-Lago, and hear testimonies from minorities who worked closely with him, like Lynne Patton, you don't see a record of a racist.
freen 10y ago
Lost federal racial discrimination lawsuit. http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/855553 http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/855553
st3v3r 10y ago
His entire spiel about Mexicans being drug dealers and rapists. And you are clearly not interested in any kind of discussion. You are simply trying to justify to yourself that, despite supporting someone who is clearly an abhorrent person, you are not an abhorrent person. And I'm not buying it.
- spinlock 10y ago
  How about stating very publicly that a judge could not be impartial because he's Mexican. That's kinda textbook right there.
  - SnowFace 10y ago
    Not really. It's 100% standard to dismiss a judge for having a bias. You can't look at her being Mexican in isolation. When you consider how the media spun his statements on Mexicans, how the judge is a member of La Rasa, and how he wants to build a wall, bias is a very valid concern.
    - dragonwriter 10y ago
      > You can't look at her being Mexican in isolation Trump's comments on the judge (who is not female, and also is American, not Mexican) did, though after-the-fact rationalizations of the comments by the campaign and other apologists added other considerations. > you need to consider how the media spun his statements on Mexicans They didn't: they reported exactly what he said, and they took it at face value. > how he wants to build a wall So? > and how the judge is a member of pro-Latino group La Rasa "La Raza" is not the name of a pro-Latino group, it's a phrase that is used in the name of many different groups with no organizational relationship. (It is a reference to the post-traditional-race blended identity laid out in Vasconcelos' La Raza Cósmica.) And, assuming that the Wall is not an anti-Latino policy, why would being a member of a pro-Latino group be a source of bias?
      - SnowFace 10y ago
        The nit-picks are irrelevant. La Raza has a record of supporting illegal immigrants. Trump wants to build a wall. My broader point that the judge had a reasonable chance of bias stands, and Trump was right to point this out. > They didn't: they reported exactly what he said, and they took it at face value. They didn't. They took his statements out of context and then "fact checked" the misinterpretation time and time again. Find me one example where he spoke bad about Mexicans.

cr0sh 10y ago

I googled "trump racist comments" - and got a slew of articles. Here is but one from Fortune: http://fortune.com/2016/06/07/donald-trump-racism-quotes/ http://fortune.com/2016/06/07/donald-trump-racism-quotes/ "A well-educated black has a tremendous advantage" "Black guys counting my money! I hate it" "Least racist person on earth" There's three. You can find more. As far as the last one, one might argue "How is that racist?" Guess what - when you aren't racist, you don't need to declare it. Plus - that comment technically suggests that at a minimum, he admits that he's possibly just "a little" racist...

SnowFace 10y ago
> "A well-educated black has a tremendous advantage" How is that racist? Isn't that the point of affirmative action? > "Black guys counting my money! I hate it" Says a guy that Trump fired. I'm skeptical, to say the least. > "Least racist person on earth" Doesn't sound very racist to me. > Guess what - when you aren't racist, you don't need to declare it. When you're constantly called a racist, then yes, you do need to declare it. > Plus - that comment technically suggests that at a minimum, he admits that he's possibly just "a little" racist... It doesn't, and this is playing word games. His communication style is to talk in extremes, and I'm sure he would have said "I'm the hugest non-racist there is" if it had the same ring to it. Any more examples?

freen 10y ago

Lost federal racial discrimination lawsuit. http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/855553 http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/855553

Uhhrrr 10y ago
Correction: Settled a federal racial discrimination lawsuit.
- freen 10y ago
  I guess Trump didn't have a strong case. I wonder why?
  - Uhhrrr 10y ago
    The counterparty was the Department of Justice.
SnowFace 10y ago
He settled the case, not lost. He also was never accused of discrimination himself, by anybody. Others were. He was the new President of his father's business in an era of witchhunts, and he got dragged into it, but if you look at his actions since then, like desegregating Mar-A-Lago, and hear testimonies from minorities who worked closely with him, like Lynne Patton, you don't see a record of a racist.

freen 10y ago

Lost federal racial discrimination lawsuit. http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/855553 http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/855553

st3v3r 10y ago

His entire spiel about Mexicans being drug dealers and rapists. And you are clearly not interested in any kind of discussion. You are simply trying to justify to yourself that, despite supporting someone who is clearly an abhorrent person, you are not an abhorrent person. And I'm not buying it.

spinlock 10y ago
How about stating very publicly that a judge could not be impartial because he's Mexican. That's kinda textbook right there.
- SnowFace 10y ago
  Not really. It's 100% standard to dismiss a judge for having a bias. You can't look at her being Mexican in isolation. When you consider how the media spun his statements on Mexicans, how the judge is a member of La Rasa, and how he wants to build a wall, bias is a very valid concern.
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    > You can't look at her being Mexican in isolation Trump's comments on the judge (who is not female, and also is American, not Mexican) did, though after-the-fact rationalizations of the comments by the campaign and other apologists added other considerations. > you need to consider how the media spun his statements on Mexicans They didn't: they reported exactly what he said, and they took it at face value. > how he wants to build a wall So? > and how the judge is a member of pro-Latino group La Rasa "La Raza" is not the name of a pro-Latino group, it's a phrase that is used in the name of many different groups with no organizational relationship. (It is a reference to the post-traditional-race blended identity laid out in Vasconcelos' La Raza Cósmica.) And, assuming that the Wall is not an anti-Latino policy, why would being a member of a pro-Latino group be a source of bias?
    - SnowFace 10y ago
      The nit-picks are irrelevant. La Raza has a record of supporting illegal immigrants. Trump wants to build a wall. My broader point that the judge had a reasonable chance of bias stands, and Trump was right to point this out. > They didn't: they reported exactly what he said, and they took it at face value. They didn't. They took his statements out of context and then "fact checked" the misinterpretation time and time again. Find me one example where he spoke bad about Mexicans.