Political Roundtable Part XIV

[Wizardspride]

Ok, I've asked & asked -- now I'm going to ask again.

Where is nate in this discussion?

I don't think you get to be a vociferous Donald Trump supporter, to have a photoshopped cloud image of his profile as your avatar (talk about hero worship!), to proclaim him smarter than his opponents, 2 steps ahead of them, & to take a public position on intellectual inequality among the (so-called) races, and then remain silent on events of the kind we've seen in Charlottesville the last several days (not to mention silent on the White House response to those events).

Or, I guess I am forced to say, if a person does remain silent, that I can't see any inference to draw except that he is a supporter of these groups (as is nate's or anyone's rights) & that he also approves of what we've just witnessed them doing. That he approves of explicit, conscious Nazism & even of the instances of violence.

I can't & wouldn't say this of nate; that would imply that I knew it to be true, which I don't. Yet, absent some kind of statement from nate, I can't see another inference to draw. Am I wrong? More importantly, will we hear from nate on the subject?

Was literally just about to post asking about Nate. Dude straight up disappeared from this thread.

Nate said he would change his opinion on Trump if it was proven he lied about Obama wiretapping him.

Interestingly, that's when he became scarce in this thread.

He did the same when it looked as if Trump was going to lose the election.

Follow the pattern.

[verbal8]

I dunno. Pretty sure he has a long history of housing discrimination.

That said, he clearly won't denounce Nazis because they make up a large part of his base. Could be disastrous for his approval rating.

Trump truly is a complete and utter scumbag, and anyone who voted for him should feel deeply remorseful at this stage. Sadly, lots of Trump voters probably liked what he said.

Perhaps Mrs Clinton was accurate in describing a certain segment of Trump's supporters (the base imo) as "Deplorables".

She screwed the pooch on that one - didn't she say "1/2"? Still (Please Use More Appropriate Word) from a political point of view.

Especially given how strongly some of the Trump supporters have stuck with him, it would not surprise me if her statement had a fair amount of accuracy. Even if correct, it is exactly the wrong thing for a politician to express(even seemingly privately). I remember seeing something about Obama describing how he won some of the Midwestern states. He said he attended events in areas he had no hope of winning, so that he could shift a 20/80 percent loss to 30/70 loss and make it up in the rest of the state.

[Zonkerbl]

Dudes don't call out Nate please. Have some class.

[dckingsfan]

Perhaps Mrs Clinton was accurate in describing a certain segment of Trump's supporters (the base imo) as "Deplorables".

She screwed the pooch on that one - didn't she say "1/2"? Still (Please Use More Appropriate Word) from a political point of view.

If you look at various polls you'd be shocked (or perhaps not) at some of the things a certain segment of Trump voters believe.

And yes, it REALLY was about 1/2.

I know it's something you've been pushing against for awhile now, but unfortunately it's true.

Bull... there are no numbers that back the statement - now we are solidly into fake news. Even the definition of "deplorable" is agreed upon - so how do you measure that.

AND, It was a wedge strategy to separate established Republicans from Trump and to make the case to swing voters and establishment Republicans that they should not be in the political vicinity of the “deplorables.” And guess what - it didn't work - it backfired badly. It was a stupid statement and strategy - which is what I said from day one.

[cammac]

I found many comments inspiring and very moving in your feelings about hate and intolerance.Please allow me to illustrate two things that changed my life. I grew up in a small farming community in Ontario and the only racial minority were the family that owned the Chinese restaurant.

But that didn't preclude hate or intolerance in this case it was religious intolerance when the Orange Men marched against the Catholics. I couldn't understand that in that our neighbors were Catholic and were close friends with my parents and there daughters were my friends. It started a process in my life that started questioning the value of religion.

The other was in 1967 when I was going to The College of William and Mary. I was a a small mall and a gentleman was having a car trouble. My father was a mechanic and I approached the man and asked if I could help. He was a little shocked but I found the problem was just a loose battery ground. He thanked me but also said " Son you shouldn't have done this you aren't from around here be careful". He said "god bless" the man was worried about my safety being a white man helping a black man.

I'm sorry for the millions of decent Americans of all races, religions and cultures burdened by this POS President the "Bigot in Chief".

[Wizardspride]

She screwed the pooch on that one - didn't she say "1/2"? Still (Please Use More Appropriate Word) from a political point of view.

If you look at various polls you'd be shocked (or perhaps not) at some of the things a certain segment of Trump voters believe.

And yes, it REALLY was about 1/2.

I know it's something you've been pushing against for awhile now, but unfortunately it's true.

Bull... there are no numbers that back the statement - now we are solidly into fake news. Even the definition of "deplorable" is agreed upon - so how do you measure that.

AND, It was a wedge strategy to separate established Republicans from Trump and to make the case to swing voters and establishment Republicans that they should not be in the political vicinity of the “deplorables.” And guess what - it didn't work - it backfired badly. It was a stupid statement and strategy - which is what I said from day one.

In the interest of keeping this cordial, we'll just agree to disagree.

[AFM]

Thought better of it.

Good decision. Nate's a good guy.

[DCZards]

Nate pretty much stopped posting in this thread months ago. I'm cool with that. Free speech also means the freedom to not speak--or post.

I certainly don't think Nate should be called out for choosing not to post.

[gtn130]

Nate pretty much stopped posting in this thread months ago. I'm cool with that. Free speech also means the freedom to not speak--or post.

I certainly don't think Nate should be called out for choosing not to post.

Yeah it's totally his right to not post here lol. That said, it's also totally my right to say that I find it lame and cowardly that he ducked out of this thread after months of sanctimony and sharing of fake news.

And I have no idea why people want to be so soft on him - I'm sure he's a reasonably good basketball poster and outwardly nice person, but the dude has shared a bunch of racist stuff on this message board. Maybe you guys should rethink your priorities.

[gtn130]

Thought better of it.

Good decision. Nate's a good guy.

lmao

[gtn130]

There was literally a Nazi/KKK rally this weekend that resulted in an actual terrorist attack, yet people on this board still want to coddle racist Trump supporters lmaooo

[dckingsfan]

If you look at various polls you'd be shocked (or perhaps not) at some of the things a certain segment of Trump voters believe.

And yes, it REALLY was about 1/2.

I know it's something you've been pushing against for awhile now, but unfortunately it's true.

Bull... there are no numbers that back the statement - now we are solidly into fake news. Even the definition of "deplorable" is agreed upon - so how do you measure that.

AND, It was a wedge strategy to separate established Republicans from Trump and to make the case to swing voters and establishment Republicans that they should not be in the political vicinity of the “deplorables.” And guess what - it didn't work - it backfired badly. It was a stupid statement and strategy - which is what I said from day one.

In the interest of keeping this cordial, we'll just agree to disagree.

Done. Plus - we agree on more than we disagree on... we agree that those involved in the rally this weekend are a problem for this country. We just disagree on the messaging to keep them out of power.

[DCZards]

Bull... there are no numbers that back the statement - now we are solidly into fake news. Even the definition of "deplorable" is agreed upon - so how do you measure that.

AND, It was a wedge strategy to separate established Republicans from Trump and to make the case to swing voters and establishment Republicans that they should not be in the political vicinity of the “deplorables.” And guess what - it didn't work - it backfired badly. It was a stupid statement and strategy - which is what I said from day one.

The "deplorables" comment was a stupid and damaging statement on the part of HRC. But in no way do I think it was part of a broader "wedge strategy" to win votes or split the Republican Party.

[dckingsfan]

Bull... there are no numbers that back the statement - now we are solidly into fake news. Even the definition of "deplorable" is agreed upon - so how do you measure that.

AND, It was a wedge strategy to separate established Republicans from Trump and to make the case to swing voters and establishment Republicans that they should not be in the political vicinity of the “deplorables.” And guess what - it didn't work - it backfired badly. It was a stupid statement and strategy - which is what I said from day one.

The "deplorables" comment was a stupid and damaging statement on the part of HRC. But in no way do I think it was part of a broader "wedge strategy" to win votes or split the Republican Party.

Agreed on stupid and damaging - disagree on if it was an intentional wedge strategy - I think that was leaked somewhere - but I can't find it now.

I don't think that it was "THE" thing that cost her the election. But it was certainly one of the big ones... she just ran a terrible campaign and we got Trump.

[montestewart]

There was literally a Nazi/KKK rally this weekend that resulted in an actual terrorist attack, yet people on this board still want to coddle racist Trump supporters lmaooo

Yes, there most definitely was a right-wing racist rally, ostensibly to protest the erasing of history through the deaccession of Confederate statues (but obviously intended to argue for the Confederacy, slavery, racism, white power, etc.), perpetrated by outside agitators, visited on a peaceful community, erupting in violence, intended to erupt in violence, containing a right-wing terrorist act that resulted in death, with the Trump/right-wing disinformation machine in full swing spewing out the Fakest News Possible! about all aspects of the event. Trump's weak response to the events, like his weak responses to Russia and Putin, are very telling when contrasted against his lightening fast and venomous attacks to anything else, no matter how trivial. Oh well, some people really didn't know Liberace was gay.

If you feel it helps you make your point, you can call out me or anyone else here, just make sure to keep it civil (no name calling) and within the terms of service. I find it more productive discussing messaging than singling out rank-and-file messengers who are absent (which starts to sound like the comment section of news sites). I don't see the coddling you're talking about. DCZards, Zonker, and plenty of others here have pretty strongly and directly addressed right-wing messages and messengers here in the past and in the present.

[TGW]

Dudes don't call out Nate please. Have some class.

lol so calling out a white supremacist (that's what Nate is) is having no class, huh? But pushing clearly racist propaganda like the bell curve and bull from breitbart is so classy.

please take this sanctimonious BS elsewhere. if anyone deserves to get called out, it's THAT GUY

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

[montestewart]

Read on Twitter

Reminds me of when Trump called Comey a grandstander...Trump calling anyone a grandstander...speaking of JOBS!

He keeps raising absurdity to new levels.

[Zonkerbl]

Dudes don't call out Nate please. Have some class.

lol so calling out a white supremacist (that's what Nate is) is having no class, huh? But pushing clearly racist propaganda like the bell curve and bull from breitbart is so classy.

please take this sanctimonious BS elsewhere. if anyone deserves to get called out, it's THAT GUY

You make my point for me, thanks.

Come on guys, let's not become 4chan.

[gtn130]

There was literally a Nazi/KKK rally this weekend that resulted in an actual terrorist attack, yet people on this board still want to coddle racist Trump supporters lmaooo

Yes, there most definitely was a right-wing racist rally, ostensibly to protest the erasing of history through the deaccession of Confederate statues (but obviously intended to argue for the Confederacy, slavery, racism, white power, etc.), perpetrated by outside agitators, visited on a peaceful community, erupting in violence, intended to erupt in violence, containing a right-wing terrorist act that resulted in death, with the Trump/right-wing disinformation machine in full swing spewing out the Fakest News Possible! about all aspects of the event. Trump's weak response to the events, like his weak responses to Russia and Putin, are very telling when contrasted against his lightening fast and venomous attacks to anything else, no matter how trivial. Oh well, some people really didn't know Liberace was gay.

If you feel it helps you make your point, you can call out me or anyone else here, just make sure to keep it civil (no name calling) and within the terms of service. I find it more productive discussing messaging than singling out rank-and-file messengers who are absent (which starts to sound like the comment section of news sites). I don't see the coddling you're talking about. DCZards, Zonker, and plenty of others here have pretty strongly and directly addressed right-wing messages and messengers here in the past and in the present.

I take issue with the idea that we should go easy on Nate because he's a 'good guy' or whatever. Seems like you guys have a nice relationship with him, and that's cool, but that doesn't begin to excuse some of his most abhorrent posting here.

Sharing insidious fake news is one thing, but Nate made a lot of legitimately racist posts backed by specious and lightly sourced 'research' (basically white supremacist propaganda) and has been a vocal Trump defender, more or less unconditionally. I think his brand of posting was significantly different than anyone else's in that regard, and that's why I'm calling him out.

Like, I think there's a non-zero chance Nate sympathizes with these hate groups, and he's a mod here...