Octopus Overlords

"Believe me, I am so much better at what he's doing than he is."

Smutly wrote:

Holman wrote:That's not what astonished me. That's just "Drumpf > Clinton."

What's, again, incomprehensible is your "Drumpf >>>> Clinton."

Well, given that Drumpf may win the popular vote, you tell me why this is possible. If your answer is over half of the country is racist then wow.

Scraper wrote:

Smutly wrote:

Holman wrote:That's not what astonished me. That's just "Drumpf > Clinton."

What's, again, incomprehensible is your "Drumpf >>>> Clinton."

Well, given that Drumpf may win the popular vote, you tell me why this is possible. If your answer is over half of the country is racist then wow.

So I'm driving to work today and I see a yard with somewhere around 20 Trump signs in a circle with the Confederate battle flag in the middle. I live in Northern Ohio. Do you think that guy is racist or is he just a deplorable?

Unfortunately where I live we have a lot of people that hang the Confederate Battle flag somewhere near their house and 100% of them have Trump signs in their yard as well. Does this mean that all Trump voters are racist, absolutely not but it does add into the basket of deplorables percentage.

geezer wrote:

Scraper wrote:

Smutly wrote:

Holman wrote:That's not what astonished me. That's just "Drumpf > Clinton."

What's, again, incomprehensible is your "Drumpf >>>> Clinton."

Well, given that Drumpf may win the popular vote, you tell me why this is possible. If your answer is over half of the country is racist then wow.

So I'm driving to work today and I see a yard with somewhere around 20 Drumpf signs in a circle with the Confederate battle flag in the middle. I live in Northern Ohio. Do you think that guy is racist or is he just a deplorable?

Unfortunately where I live we have a lot of people that hang the Confederate Battle flag somewhere near their house and 100% of them have Drumpf signs in their yard as well. Does this mean that all Drumpf voters are racist, absolutely not but it does add into the basket of deplorables percentage.

How many times do we have to tell you - It's not racism. It's *heritage*. You know, Ohio being the heart of the Confederacy and all.

Jaymann wrote:It's an effort to get out the black vote.

The reaction to Clinton’s comments is a reflection that in 21st-century America it is considered worse by many to call somebody a racist than to actually be one...... However if we do not view Mr. Trump, a man who has referred to Mexicans as rapists, promised widespread religious discriminations against Muslims, advocated violence against African American demonstrators and supported anti-Semitic themes that are older than our country, as a racist,...than the word has no meaning at all. In other words, if Donald Trump is not a racist, what would somebody have to do to be considered a racist?...

...It is also unfair and ahistorical to assert that Trump’s racist campaign is sui generis and without antecedent in modern GOP politics. Racist appeals have been part of Republican campaigns for decades. Additionally, over the last 40 years, Republicans have made few sincere attempts to reach out to African American voters and have crafted policies that have been very damaging for African Americans. However, in most cases, and certainly at the presidential level, Republican candidates have at least sought to be subtle about their racism, and feel vaguely embarrassed by it, rather than celebrate it and place it at the center of their campaign. Trump’s campaign has been different and threatens not just to unravel whatever is left of our delicate social fabric, but to do it recklessly and seemingly with great joy.

GreenGoo wrote:Her mistake was to generalize. There was little to be gained by stating this truth, as anyone who feels any guilt at all will just double down when called on it, and those who don't feel any guilt don't give a crap.

Defiant wrote:

GreenGoo wrote:Her mistake was to generalize. There was little to be gained by stating this truth, as anyone who feels any guilt at all will just double down when called on it, and those who don't feel any guilt don't give a crap.

If there wasn't anything to be gained by stating the truth, maybe it wasn't a mistake to generalize, especially since it got the media talking about it much more than it had been previously.

GreenGoo wrote:
There was nothing to be gained and a lot of potential voters to offend. Nothing to gain, but something to lose.

GreenGoo wrote:

Defiant wrote:

GreenGoo wrote:Her mistake was to generalize. There was little to be gained by stating this truth, as anyone who feels any guilt at all will just double down when called on it, and those who don't feel any guilt don't give a crap.

If there wasn't anything to be gained by stating the truth, maybe it wasn't a mistake to generalize, especially since it got the media talking about it much more than it had been previously.

There was nothing to be gained and a lot of potential voters to offend. Nothing to gain, but something to lose.

tgb wrote:She said half, and then dialed it back to less than half. How is that generalizing Drumpf supporters?

As I posted the other day, notice that they are all now claiming to be proud of the "deplorable" group. I've yet to hear a supporter respond "Yes, some probably are deplorable, but not me".

Why do you suppose that is?

GreenGoo wrote:

tgb wrote:She said half, and then dialed it back to less than half. How is that generalizing Drumpf supporters?

As I posted the other day, notice that they are all now claiming to be proud of the "deplorable" group. I've yet to hear a supporter respond "Yes, some probably are deplorable, but not me".

Why do you suppose that is?

Wait...what? As long as you don't suggest everyone is deplorable, you're not generalizing? Drumpf said "some, I assume, are good people". Does that mean he's not generalizing about Mexican immigrants?

People are embracing the deplorable label for a variety of reasons. Some are deplorable and proud of it. These are the guys with the racist chants and comments. Some are embracing the deplorable label as a giant middle finger to Clinton. They may not be racist but are offended (understandably so) when it is suggested that they are racist for supporting drumpf. Some are embracing the deplorable label because they hate Clinton so much they are proud to wear a label that identifies them as anti-Clinton.

This is not a new phenomenon. It's like advocating for gun control by characterizing gun owners as whack job rednecks. Or only "some" as whackjob rednecks. Everyone is going to dig in and prepare for siege. It doesn't matter that you are only talking about some, because every gun owner is going to feel you're trying to lump them into that group.

An April poll taken by Reuters found that a large percentage of self-described Trump supporters describe black people as more “lazy” than whites (40 percent), “less intelligent” than whites (32 percent), more “rude” than whites (44 percent), more “violent” than whites (48 percent) and more “criminal” than whites (46 percent).

Another Reuters poll taken in July found that 58 percent of Trump supporters have either a “very unfavorable” or “somewhat unfavorable” view of the entire religion of Islam.

These are racist views. If they do not count as “deplorable,” then the word “deplorable” no longer has any meaning

GreenGoo wrote:I see you're not running for election.

tgb wrote:

GreenGoo wrote:

tgb wrote:She said half, and then dialed it back to less than half. How is that generalizing Drumpf supporters?

As I posted the other day, notice that they are all now claiming to be proud of the "deplorable" group. I've yet to hear a supporter respond "Yes, some probably are deplorable, but not me".

Why do you suppose that is?

Wait...what? As long as you don't suggest everyone is deplorable, you're not generalizing? Drumpf said "some, I assume, are good people". Does that mean he's not generalizing about Mexican immigrants?

People are embracing the deplorable label for a variety of reasons. Some are deplorable and proud of it. These are the guys with the racist chants and comments. Some are embracing the deplorable label as a giant middle finger to Clinton. They may not be racist but are offended (understandably so) when it is suggested that they are racist for supporting drumpf. Some are embracing the deplorable label because they hate Clinton so much they are proud to wear a label that identifies them as anti-Clinton.

This is not a new phenomenon. It's like advocating for gun control by characterizing gun owners as whack job rednecks. Or only "some" as whackjob rednecks. Everyone is going to dig in and prepare for siege. It doesn't matter that you are only talking about some, because every gun owner is going to feel you're trying to lump them into that group.

Let's look at the numbers. Coming, by the way, from someone working for Fox news.

An April poll taken by Reuters found that a large percentage of self-described Trump supporters describe black people as more “lazy” than whites (40 percent), “less intelligent” than whites (32 percent), more “rude” than whites (44 percent), more “violent” than whites (48 percent) and more “criminal” than whites (46 percent).

Another Reuters poll taken in July found that 58 percent of Trump supporters have either a “very unfavorable” or “somewhat unfavorable” view of the entire religion of Islam.

These are racist views. If they do not count as “deplorable,” then the word “deplorable” no longer has any meaning

If you can show me verified numbers indicating that 40-50% of Mexican immigrants are rapists and drug dealers, then your equivalency will hold water.

Otherwise it's bullshit.

Rip wrote: So really we are just talking about who has the biggest basket of deplorables

GreenGoo wrote:Everyone wants a wall. What colour it should be is the real disagreement.

In a fact sheet posted online Thursday, the campaign highlighted a number of "specific regulations to be eliminated" under the GOP nominee's economic plan, including what they called the "FDA Food Police."

“The FDA Food Police, which dictate how the federal government expects farmers to produce fruits and vegetables and even dictates the nutritional content of dog food,” it read.

“The rules govern the soil farmers use, farm and food production hygiene, food packaging, food temperatures and even what animals may roam which fields and when,” the statement continued. "It also greatly increased inspections of food 'facilities,' and levies new taxes to pay for this inspection overkill."

“But the bad part, now we will give him amazing hospitalization. He will be taken care of by some of the best doctors in the world,” the GOP nominee told the crowd at a rally in Estero, Florida. “He will be given a fully modern and updated hospital room. And he'll probably even have room service knowing the way our country is.”

Trump added that “on top of all of that, he will be represented by an outstanding lawyer,” saying Rahami’s case would take years to work its way through the criminal justice system until his eventual punishment is diluted. The Sixth Amendment ensures the right to a fair and speedy public trial and the right to a lawyer for all criminal defendants.

“What a sad situation. We must have speedy but fair trials and we must deliver a just and very harsh punishment to these people,” Trump said, to big cheers from the crowd.

tgb wrote:I just don't have the strength any more.

Moliere wrote:

tgb wrote:I just don't have the strength any more.

Weakness is sad.

Donald Trump's vice presidential running mate, Mike Pence, said he views former vice president Dick Cheney as a role model for the No. 2 job in the administration.

"I frankly hold Dick Cheney in really high regard in his role as vice president and as an American," Pence said in an interview on ABC's "This Week" that was taped on Saturday and aired on Sunday.

Smoove_B wrote:Not sure how I missed this last week (maybe we were too busy talking about pneumonia or Dr. Oz), but apparently Trump floated the fantastic idea that he would eliminate food safety regulations:

malchior wrote:Maybe he pines for torture like the Donald or having the power to turn our foreign policy into a quagmire that limits our range of motion for nearly a generation.