Is the backlash against Trump... overblown?

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

CmdrKing, these "concentration camps" are nothing but walls. How can four walls surrounding someone be "inhumane" as you so put? What is this, the Batman trap with the spiky walls closing in? That's just silly.

[ProfessorDetective]

CmdrKing, these "concentration camps" are nothing but walls. How can four walls surrounding someone be "inhumane" as you so put? What is this, the Batman trap with the spiky walls closing in? That's just silly.

You ever read about solitary confinement? If not, here:

youtu.be/I2wTjWC45kA

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I always wanted to test myself with solitary confinement. Kinda seems like running on a treadmill.

BTW yeah that's pretty common understanding of the procedure. Not surprising it takes up a particularly short episode of ARE.

[Admiral X]

I'm actually wondering if the reports on the conditions are accurate or not. We've already been lied to more than once on the subject.

[Darth Wedgius]

"To deny parents the ability to wash their infant’s bottles is unconscionable and could be considered intentional mental and emotional abuse"

digivolves into:

"Conditions are described as so unhygienic as to amount to the intentional cause of disease"

So we go from one person's unsubstantiated opinion about what something could be considered as (not should be considered as, not could be, but could be considered as) mental and emotional abuse somehow morphing into the definite equivalent of desiring to inflict disease, all without any evidence of such intention.

So, CmdrKind, why should anyone take you seriously?

[CmdrKing]

That was the conclusion of the doctor who toured facilities I quoted earlier. And anyone with a lick of sense would know that deliberately denying a highly concentrated population of people basic hygiene is creating a hotbed of disease.

So add “failure of basic knowledge of the topic” and “failure of reading comprehension” to the list of reasons you’re not to be taken seriously.

[AllanO]

To be even more fair, he didn't. He was talking about illegal immigration from Mexico, and here's the full quote:

It’s true, and these are the best and the finest. When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.

So (1) it doesn't mean all Mexicans, and (2) it acknowledges that even some of the illegal immigrants are good people.

Uhh, he literally says "sends its people" other then their diplomatic core does Mexico send any people to the US, like is there a program to send students or something?

It seems like he means more than people the Mexican government officially sends. You think he means illegal immigrants, but why limit it to illegal immigrants? If the term "sends" is being used loosely wouldn't it equally apply to legal immigrants?

Conversely, there is little evidence that even illegal immigrants do more crime, so we can imagine by "Mexico sends its people" he means " you hear about Mexican people committing violent crimes" so by definition the one you hear about committing violent crimes are those accused of violent crimes and indeed they are more likely to be violent criminals than a person picked at random, but he did not say that he said "sends its people".

It seems like Trump was saying whatever you want him to say, everything and nothing. This means at best he is being dangerously loose with his language...

Imagine if someone gets up in front of a crowd and says "You people are the best, but the police aren't sending their best. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with them. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people." I would interpret this to mean he thinks cops are generally criminals (I think you would too), but under your flexible interpretation if we fairly applied it to all we might need to conclude, he meant some subgroup of police officers. He is just concerned about due process, police brutality and the like. I find that a bizarre interpretation of those words, hence my interpretation of Trump...

"bUt ObAmA dId iT tOoOooOo!!!!"

So? Obama was wrong then just as Trump is wrong now.

Except it never became a problem until Trump was President. Kind of like how Trump only became racist and sexist when he decided to run on the Republican ticket.

Just to be clear people have been complaining about Trump's racism for decades. A quick check on google books reveals lots of people in the 90s commenting on his ads that the Central Park Five should be executed, the idea that it touched off a "lynch hysteria" seems to have been in the headlines of major papers at the time. I mean I did not see a quote where they called him racist but the context in which the ads are mentioned etc. seems pretty clearly to imply it.

Likewise Obama got criticism for his harsh immigration policy and say his use of drones on many occasions, it was reported in major media. People were like Obama is killing people extra-judicially this is bad, he is even executing American citizens without due process, bad! The criticism existed it was aired in the media...

So these things were problems before you noticed people complaining about them. Many people may have let Obama slide either because of other stuff he was doing or because the Republican counter proposals that seemed the alternative were worse or that it was in aid of comprehensive immigration reform or some other relevant bit of context. Likewise fewer people cared about Trump before he ran for president and was just a flamboyant New York millionaire. However .that does not mean they would have given the conduct A marks or a passing grade or whatever before if they had bothered to think about it for five seconds....

-----

Just on the general subject of this thread. I take Trump to be the most incompetent president I have any clear sense of. His incompetence means he does not get that much done (he could not repeal and replace Obamacare etc.), which minimizes the amount of damage he can do (although when a Republican congress or whatever can enable him he does take credit for their work and do the minimum to get a those things completed). His incompetence leads him to happily play with rhetoric and policies that more competent and responsible politicians won't because they recognize the risks and implications, so he does lots of damage there. Whether he actually believes anything he says or does I have a hard time knowing, his target audience is pretty clear though on things like immigration...

So yeah in the end Trump's cowardice, inability to work hard and so on may preserve the US from any sustained policy blunders like protracted unjust foreign wars etc. Assuming he does not enable anyone foreign or domestic to do such things, which to me seems all to likely.

[Darth Wedgius]

To be even more fair, he didn't. He was talking about illegal immigration from Mexico, and here's the full quote:

It’s true, and these are the best and the finest. When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.

So (1) it doesn't mean all Mexicans, and (2) it acknowledges that even some of the illegal immigrants are good people.

Uhh, he literally says "sends its people" other then their diplomatic core does Mexico send any people to the US, like is there a program to send students or something?

It seems like he means more than people the Mexican government officially sends. You think he means illegal immigrants, but why limit it to illegal immigrants? If the term "sends" is being used loosely wouldn't it equally apply to legal immigrants?

Conversely, there is little evidence that even illegal immigrants do more crime, so we can imagine by "Mexico sends its people" he means " you hear about Mexican people committing violent crimes" so by definition the one you hear about committing violent crimes are those accused of violent crimes and indeed they are more likely to be violent criminals than a person picked at random, but he did not say that he said "sends its people".

It seems like Trump was saying whatever you want him to say, everything and nothing. This means at best he is being dangerously loose with his language...

Imagine if someone gets up in front of a crowd and says "You people are the best, but the police aren't sending their best. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with them. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people." I would interpret this to mean he thinks cops are generally criminals (I think you would too), but under your flexible interpretation if we fairly applied it to all we might need to conclude, he meant some subgroup of police officers. He is just concerned about due process, police brutality and the like. I find that a bizarre interpretation of those words, hence my interpretation of Trump...

To continue your comparison, if a subset of police were often drug-using criminals, it would mot be anti-cop to criticize that sub-set.

It's not confusing at all if you're familiar with sets and sub-sets.

[Darth Wedgius]

If I assumed a hotbed of disease that wasn't happening was intended I would best not be taken seriously, because I wouldn't be rational.