I’d like to give it a day or two to see if anyone (especially from those who most often are in agreement with you) here will offer any pushback against your claim,
“that a plurality of Americans are just A-OK with being led by a White Supremacist”
As disappointed as I’ll be that you most likely won’t, I won’t be surprise. It will be evidence of the echo chamber that exists here. Not necessarily an echo chamber where some dissent is not allowed, but an echo chamber where the content of dissenting views is not even considered.
How utterly delicious.
And, of course, there is no pushback on such tripe.
Ok, admittedly, I’ve given very little time for any. But I see that you’ve, in an hour, already received two likes on the comment. What an echo chamber of confirmation bias.
Would not a genuine response have been, “What exactly is your point?”
Yes, I can imagine a genuine White Supremacist possibly saying to someone not “White,” “Yes, you did a better job of sweeping the floor than you did last time.” (a compliment to a person of color."
You’re equating such with Trump’s immediate and uncoerced first suggestion as to a candidate for his second in command, well over a decade before being in a position even to require a vice presidential candidate, a black woman.
Again, that you receive no critique for such a strawman is a pathetic sign.
Hey, I will definitely concede that a lot of americans are something approaching willfully blind to the problem. For example I’m pretty sure you’d deny he’s a white supremacist. Despite evidence plainly supporting that conclusion.
But I guess you’d say you’re not okay with it, you just deny that he is one. But if Trump blaming an air-crash on low IQ DEI hires (or saying that people marching with Nazis and white nationlists had fine people among them) isn’t evidence enough, what would it take to convince you?
What claim do you think I was referring to? The claim referenced was,
If you echo chamber members have questions as to what I’m referring to, you need only ask. To all of you, what might be an actual curious person, an honest skeptic, to Trump being a "White Supremacist” Is that true and necessarily so because you wish it to be? Haven’t you the slightest interest in being able to support this with the least rigor?
That could also have been a genuine response, assuming the person who wrote it was being genuine.
It seems you do not think my response was genuine. Well, I can live with that. Especially since you then went on to confirm that what I suspected you were saying was, in fact, just what you were saying:
So the most you can imagine is a White Supremacist making a backhanded “complement” to a person of colour. i.e. not a complement at all.
And there we go.
Well, gee, isn’t it a shame he was never in a position to actually choose a presidential running mate, so we could know what he would really do in those circumstances.
I’m astounded how readily the “in group” gives likes to every response of “their clan”.
However, it fits with my thoughts on this “discussion board”.
I was not referring to anyone wanting the U.S. president to be a white supremacist.
Cover the following response and see if you can’t figure that out on your own.
Here is the answer. It can’t be that difficult.
I’m not saying (and it is hard to see that any careful reading would be interpreted otherwise) that anyone here wants “the U.S. president to be a white supremacist?” I’m saying that @Faizal_Ali would wish it were true that (just read the quote), “that a plurality of Americans are just A-OK with being led by a White Supremacist”
Clear?
Not knowing any actual "White Supremacist"s, I’m sorry not to be able to say what an actual “White Supremacist” would offer in a way of compliment.
Allowing that a real actual “White Supremacist” would be hateful, I can’t imagine them making a compliment to your,
of any significance. But maybe to you a actual “White Supremacist” is merely a label of convivence that you apply to
And of course your array of clapping seals are sure to follow your piffle with a like.
Hey Sam why don’t you answer the questions posed to you?
If Trump blaming an air-crash on low IQ DEI hires (or saying that people marching with Nazis and white nationlists had fine people among them) isn’t evidence enough that he’s a white supremacist, what would it take to convince you?
Who could he be referring to with his accusation of low IQ DEI hires? Who would that be?
The “fine people” at the Charlottesville rally, who is it—at a rally of Nazis and white nationalists—that are fine people but aren’t, well, nazis and white nationalists?
Notice the question marks here. Please try to answer them all.
Oh also, have they found the low IQ DEI hire to blame for the air crash yet? Surely they’ve identified such a person and Trump wouldn’t just casually throw such a disgusting lie out there at a press conference. Right?
It is such an outlandish claim; may I suggest you ask the person who made the claim what evidence he has for it? Apart from any credible evidence offered by him, I’d make a guess that he wishes to dismiss valid points against his own views while having no arguments to support his own views, nor arguments against his opponent’s. Name calling is often the resort of one having no rational points to make.
Or maybe he’d weasel out of the claim by suggesting that the meaning of plurality of he intended was 3. in the list below,
the excess of votes received by the leading candidate, in an election in which there are three or more candidates, over those received by the next candidate ( majority ).
I will concede that there may be 2 Americans that would be okay with being led by a white supremacist. If that was all that @Faizal_Ali meant I’d have to give him that. But then I’d take issue with whether Trump is one. And of course Trump is one, as much as Charlamagne ain’t black. https://youtu.be/_0H0qBBkRe4?si=ERNru7stk8Q4jlog
Do you ever even ponder why, in a venue where people actually listen to one another and at the same time feel free to challenge vacuous comments, (even if offered by one on “their team”) a post including, “Why would anyone want a plurality of Americans to be okay with being led by a white supremacist?” could jive with,
“Harris appears to have won 80 percent of the Black vote, according to an exit poll by The Associated Press.
But that’s a drop of 10 percentage points compared with 2020 when the current president, Joe Biden, won nine of 10 Black votes.”
Might these Black voters also be,
Does this accidentally get past the moderators or is that now,
Sam why are you accusing us of wishing it to be true that Trump is a white supremacist? When you say “because you wish it to be true?” you are accusing us of wishing it to be true. Why would we wish it to be true? We are saying that it is a bad thing that he is a white supremacist. We wish it wasn’t true.
Your attempt to deflect away from this is becoming quite pathetic. But never mind all that, please answer the questions I posed to you in my previous two posts.
Two? How generous. What about all the people at the Charlottesville rally (you know, the one consisting of Nazis and white nationalists that Trump says had fine people among them, who were so fine they had no problem marching along Nazis and white nationalists).
You think they would prefer DEI Kamala to King-deporter Trump?
Hmm. Let’s review, shall we? My initial comment was
And you just wrote:
I fail to see how surmising your actual viewpoint with near total accuracy is “duplicitous and deceitful.” Could you please explain?
Ah, I see what might be confusing you. It appears you believe I have written that a plurality of Americans are themselves White Supremacists. Allow me to disabuse you of that notion: I did not write, nor do I believe, any such thing.
Hope that helps!
Oh, it is quite simple. Donald Trump, a White Supremacist, received 49.8% of the vote in the last US Presidential election.
That was a higher percentage than any other candidate received and it, therefore, constitutes a plurality.
I am admittedly making the assumption that, when someone votes for a candidate in a Presidential election, they are A-OK with that person actually becoming President. That seems to me a perfectly reasonable assumption. But, if you disagree, let us know your reasoning.
I am presuming that those who voted provide a reasonably representative sample of the population as a whole. Similar conclusions are regularly drawn by researchers using much smaller sample sizes.
What an echo chamber of confirmation bias.