Is the backlash against Trump... overblown?

[Darth Wedgius]

Asylum seekers and other refugees are folk fleeing unlivable conditions at home, usually near-certain death. They are *highly motivated* to avoid the appearance of impropriety or to give the host country cause to deny them or send them back.
You give them a court date, ask for their host address (or provide approved hosts if they have no local connections), and can have extremely high confidence they’ll move heaven and earth to make that date.

The alternative is treating people like rational human beings and not violent inhuman criminals. This isn’t hard if you look at the data and engage your entire brain.

Violent? Inhuman? Who said that?

Now we have to distinguish asylum seekers and other refugees from illegal aliens. The two categories overlap, but are not the same thing. About 43% of illegal aliens skip court hearings. Asylum seekers show up about 89% of the time.

[Admiral X]

Summary of the last page-

Darth: We cannot definitively say that people who vote to reelect a president whose only "successful" acts as president have been acts of white supremacy are also white supremacists.

Also Darth: There is no middle ground between indefinite detention baby prisons and completely open boarders.

It's really quite a trip to see people not realize what they're saying.

Admiral: I'm surprised you disagree with the premise that the correct response to dictatorial inclinations is constant, vociferous blacklash and disapproval.

People like you truly do live in a magical funhouse mirror universe.

[Admiral X]

And as an aside, yes, obviously there is a spectrum between "Completely open borders" and "snatch children from their parents and toss them into cages". We can do better and arguably have the moral obligation to do so, especially when we apply our own morality to the situation, that is, our morality and principles as a nation.

Is sex trafficking of children just not a concern of yours at all then?

[Nealithi]

but let's be clear: 100% of people who vote for Donald Trump in 2020 are in fact white supremacists.

Okay I was nodding at your post till we got here. Then you lost my shaky support. At least in part as it is the same generalization President Trump is being accused of doing.


To answer the thread question with my opinion. Yes, and it is detracting from real issues that need addressing.

[Riedquat]

but let's be clear: 100% of people who vote for Donald Trump in 2020 are in fact white supremacists.

Okay I was nodding at your post till we got here. Then you lost my shaky support. At least in part as it is the same generalization President Trump is being accused of doing.

It's certainly the type of response that leaves me feeling that Trump and his detractors are two sides of the same coin.

[CmdrKing]

Violent? Inhuman? Who said that?

A factual description of the required mindset at play. Preemptively confining people in squalid conditions for indefinite periods is inhuman. Such precautions are, at most permissible, afforded for those who are an immediate violent threat to those around them. So the presumption required to justify such conditions are that those being so contained are either not human or are violent immediate threats.

Otherwise: citation needed.

Okay I was nodding at your post till we got here. Then you lost my shaky support. At least in part as it is the same generalization President Trump is being accused of doing.

His various policies that are directly in support of white supremacy are those he as pursed most tenaciously, most vociferously, with the least support from the legislative (that is, he "owns" it more than policies that originate in the senate or at the state level), and with the most advancement in the face of setbacks.

In 2016, one might have supposed his worst rhetoric was, in fact, mere rhetoric and his priorities would be his catch phrases like "drain the swamp" or "running government like business" or "saving jobs". He's actively done the opposite of all those things in pursuit of the goals of white supremacy.

That is to say, he has a record now. He has proven he is in deeds what his words showed him to be. There is no veil of maybes to shroud him. A vote for Donald Trump in 2020 is a knowing vote for a white supremacist whose primary policy goals are furthering white supremacy. At that point, the only term for someone who shows such support is also white supremacist.
To speak in lesser terms is to continue the same endless dance that has allow the sins of our past to continue in mutated forms for centuries to survive another generation. We must speak plain what has happened and continues to happen, and at last well and truly examine these things and the cracks in our character that allow them to be. There's no value in shaming individual people on the matter, because it's inherited myths and attitudes passed down for generations. But there is value in every single person who takes that hard look and just fucking stops lending power to those who drive this forward.

[Makeshift Python]

"bUt ObAmA dId iT tOoOooOo!!!!"

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

[Nealithi]

Okay I was nodding at your post till we got here. Then you lost my shaky support. At least in part as it is the same generalization President Trump is being accused of doing.

His various policies that are directly in support of white supremacy are those he as pursed most tenaciously, most vociferously, with the least support from the legislative (that is, he "owns" it more than policies that originate in the senate or at the state level), and with the most advancement in the face of setbacks.

In 2016, one might have supposed his worst rhetoric was, in fact, mere rhetoric and his priorities would be his catch phrases like "drain the swamp" or "running government like business" or "saving jobs". He's actively done the opposite of all those things in pursuit of the goals of white supremacy.

That is to say, he has a record now. He has proven he is in deeds what his words showed him to be. There is no veil of maybes to shroud him. A vote for Donald Trump in 2020 is a knowing vote for a white supremacist whose primary policy goals are furthering white supremacy. At that point, the only term for someone who shows such support is also white supremacist.
To speak in lesser terms is to continue the same endless dance that has allow the sins of our past to continue in mutated forms for centuries to survive another generation. We must speak plain what has happened and continues to happen, and at last well and truly examine these things and the cracks in our character that allow them to be. There's no value in shaming individual people on the matter, because it's inherited myths and attitudes passed down for generations. But there is value in every single person who takes that hard look and just fucking stops lending power to those who drive this forward.

My issue is this . . . This is an absolute. A with me or against me line. And I think it is in error. I think the Democratic party can still put forth a candidate that will manage to offend people to flocking to President Trump's vote. If only to keep them from office. He is not a good man, in my opinion. That might be an understatement to some. But it is all that is needed without getting into rhetoric that is over used. I hope the Democratic party takes him seriously and actually selects a candidate that can at the very least prove a challenge to the man. And that they don't put up sacrificial candidates. Either because they do not think they can win. Or worse, because they think they can put anyone up and best him.

Basically don't go with, for lack of a better term, white washing the issue and outcome. Be angry, but take the threat seriously. You yourself said he laid out other terms in his last campaign. He can confuse people with supporting business and making America great again, etc. Because there is quite a bit of time between now and next November. And many people seem to have short memories.

[CmdrKing]

Think of it this way. Before he took office, all Trump was was his rhetoric. Determining what was talk and what was his actual agenda was reading tea leaves. Now, even if he adds new planks to his platform, even if he means it, he’s currently doing these acts of white supremacy. It’s inescapably part of his platform (barring an active and forceful reversal of his standing policies).
The only absolute assertion is that you don’t get to disavow naked white supremacy while still voting for Trump now that he’s proven his sincerity.

More broadly the idea is to hammer home the nature and severity of Trump’s presidency. To reinforce for people this is what he is and this is what you’re voting for.
If we’re looking at a purely pragmatic campaign strategy level? There aren’t any other finalized candidates to point at yet. I’m entirely in agreement that it’s better to promote good policy to motivate people, but since we don’t know who else is running we don’t know what that policy might be.
But refusing to let people forget or ignore what Trump is can be done now.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

In 2016, one might have supposed his worst rhetoric was, in fact, mere rhetoric and his priorities would be his catch phrases like "drain the swamp" or "running government like business" or "saving jobs". He's actively done the opposite of all those things in pursuit of the goals of white supremacy.

This is a salient point to bring up lol.