Jump to content

For those who defend Trump


Ice_nine

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Ice_nine said:

These are the kind of people that also support him http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/11/richard-spencer-speech-npi/508379/

Thoughts?

My thoughts on it are this neo-nazi group loves the free commercial Atlantic has written about them, now they have that free commercial here. Your question is accusatory and full of bs. I believe your doing exactly as Atlantic intended which was to go out and judge or accuse Trump supporters. No Trump defender here supports neo-nazis groups. But no Trump defender should have to answer your accusatory judgemental question. Ask the neo-nazi defenders on Phatmass instead. And the election is over can election threads be over too, please?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The advocate, a gay magazine, also fully supported Pope Francis and made him their "man of the year" after his "who am I to judge" speech.  

I guess that makes Pope Francis gay and the rest of us homosexuals. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and apparently this is a pro-atheist site since I've been allowed to post here for years.

And I'm also inferring you may have voted for Hillary since you seem so disgusted with Trump.  Where have you been the last few days?   In therapy coping with the fear of Donald, or volunteering at the abortion clinic to make it safe and legal?

How about those Muslims?  If neo nazis support Trump, it's obvious that all of Islam wants to cut Catholic's heads off.

I've never seen or heard of a squirrel cutting someone's head off or burning a cross.    We should live in trees and eat nuts.   

Edited by Anomaly
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reality, people are complicated and are not just either demons or angels.   I voted for Trump and was a little relieved when I thought he wasn't going to win early election night. I'm glad we have a new president without a military revolution.    

The campaigns and the media was about sensationalizing the worst of the candidates.  Saul Alinsky Rules are effective marketing ploys, and fundamentally destructive to intelligent discourse.   We've been pawns of the media so we will watch, click, and see ads for new cars and cell phones.  The wanted our attention only.  There was/is no intention to impartially inform.   Of course we mostly believe we chose between two evils instead of choosing between the better of two flawed candidates.  

Now is a the time to look for and encourage the best in each other, not look for and highlight the worse to feed fear and hatred.  It's called pragmatic optimism.  According to the Bible, God would have left the city of Sodom intact if only ten good people could be found.  There is a lesson in there somewhere.  

Edited by Anomaly
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, KnightofChrist said:

My thoughts on it are this neo-nazi group loves the free commercial Atlantic has written about them, now they have that free commercial here. Your question is accusatory and full of bs. I believe your doing exactly as Atlantic intended which was to go out and judge or accuse Trump supporters. No Trump defender here supports neo-nazis groups. But no Trump defender should have to answer your accusatory judgemental question. Ask the neo-nazi defenders on Phatmass instead. And the election is over can election threads be over too, please?

What accusatory judgmental question? She just asked what your thoughts on the article were. Where did she suggest that anyone here is a racist?

I suppose that I would be a little defensive or uneasy with my choice had I voted for Trump as well. That is understandable.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Anomaly said:

In reality, people are complicated and are not just either demons or angels.   I voted for Trump and was a little relieved when I thought he wasn't going to win early election night. I'm glad we have a new president without a military revolution.    

The campaigns and the media was about sensationalizing the worst of the candidates.  Saul Alinsky Rules are effective marketing ploys, and fundamentally destructive to intelligent discourse.   We've been pawns of the media so we will watch, click, and see ads for new cars and cell phones.  The wanted our attention only.  There was/is no intention to impartially inform.   Of course we mostly believe we chose between two evils instead of choosing between the better of two flawed candidates.  

Well said.  However, at this point I'm excited for the possibilities of a new administration.  

This will be an interesting historical footnote, and the Democratic Party could remake itself, if its members develop any intellectual curiosity about how their candidate lost to a reality star.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Peace said:

What accusatory judgmental question? She just asked what your thoughts on the article were. Where did she suggest that anyone here is a racist?

You were/are a Trump detractor, there are others on PM who were and are Trump detractors. But you're not going to see me asking loaded accusatory questions to Trump detractors.

Such as what the Phatmass Trump detractors think about the assaults on Trump defenders, the fabricated claims of attacks by Trump defenders on Trump detractors, the burning of buildings, smashing of windows, smashing of cars, the calls to assassinate Trump, the calls to rape Trump's wife, the over all violent protests against Trump (aka riots), and other acts of domestic terrorism by fringe Trump detractors.

I'm not going to do that for the same reasons I objected to being associated with neo-nazis and because I know no one here supports those things so asking would only be insulting and pointless. Just because I defended Trump and others did so on PM, doesn't mean we should have to answer for some wacko neo-nazi jackholes. No more than you and other PM Trump detractors should have to answer for the violent wacko fringe Trump detractors. It would be rude, it would be judgemental and it would be accusatory.

Quote

I suppose that I would be a little defensive or uneasy with my choice had I voted for Trump as well. That is understandable.

You've just proven my point with that passive aggressive accusation. I am not a neo-nazi and I do not answer for the actions of neo-nazis. It should be assumed that I do not support neo-nazis. You are not a rioting domestic terrorist, you do not need to answer for the actions of domestic terrorists. It should be assumed that you don't support domestic terrorists. Being for or against Trump isn't good cause to ask such loaded questions.

Edited by KnightofChrist
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, CatherineM said:

Lot of neo-nazis voted for Romney and Bush. They're citizens and allowed to vote like the rest of us. 

Bush and Romney didn't appoint Steve Bannon to a position in their cabinet though. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This really isn't the issue. Everyone has their nut jobs. These people are excited by Trump, in a way previous Republicans didn't excite them, but it's not like they weren't on the fringes of conservatism before. What is worrisome is that Trump might bring this sort of explicit racism more into the mainstream. Ironically, I think the all out media coverage is only fueling that mainstreaming (see this article: http://thefederalist.com/2016/11/22/dear-media-please-dont-normalize-alt-right/)

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...