11 Likes
I think the president âowedâ it to the people who voted for him. I said I can understand, But I didnât say I condone or support it.
I think it was an emotional response to another point. What we really know what is going on the backstage?
I think I cannot say anything about It. I live in another continent. But I was touched by the images of children and parents crying.
'Twernât nuthinâŚ
The use of the word infuriates me, especially when I know that so many USians go to foreign countries and fund their trips by working âillegallyâ, but prefer to use the phrase âworking under the tableâ, 'cuz âillegalâ has such a bad ring to it. Amirite?
14 Likes
White supremacists overwhelmingly support him, so he goes with their agenda.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/15/us/politics/trump-charlottesville-white-nationalists.html
9 Likes
That makes it ânecessaryâ from the political POV of his having to pander to bigoted morons and not from the POV of promulgating effective policies (as the cartoon suggests, going after the employers would address the issue far more efficiently).
3 Likes
And so they did it.
They promised a lot of things and they are implementing them slowly, day after day. Are the people who voted for him satisfied with this?
Theyâre rubes driven by bigotry so they still support him. That doesnât mean keeping his promises to them result in the benefits they expect or that theyâll call him on that. It definitely doesnât mean keeping his promises will result in effective policy â quite the opposite in practise.
Itâs not all that much different in Europe with parties like AfD and Lega Nord and whatever the FN is calling themselves these days to make the French forget theyâre not xenophobic fascists. They may know how to throw big political rallies but despite the old saying theyâre rarely capable of making the trains run on time.
5 Likes
And thatâs what intrigues me. What I read in local newspapers and in the media in other countries gives the impression that everything that was built in the past decades is being put aside.
What actions, which seem chaotic to those outside the US, are doing for their country?
The presidentâs apologists in this part of the world (I swear they exist) say jobs have grown, the world is safer, and so on.
Honestly, it seems like none of this is quite true.
Certainly anything that Obama put in place is being reversed. Thatâs Il Doucheâs main motivation for being in the White House in the first place.
Also, heâs doing his part to undermine Western liberal democratic institutions and the treaties and alliances that support them. Funny what a lifelong history of bigotry and money worship and hundreds of millions of dollars of debt to oligarchs dependent on Putinâs goodwill will do to an American politician.
In substance, no. The jobs being created are usually low-paying part-time ones and theyâre not enough to offset the many people whoâve given up on being employed and dropped out of the unemployment numbers altogether. âThe world is saferâ is true only in those brief moments when Dolt-45 switches from taunting and threatening Iran and N. Korea to offering them peace terms and in the sense that heâll go along with whatever Putin tells him to.
No-one with any sense thinks that a border wall is an effective solution to illegal border crossings or that separating children from their parents and imprisoning them is somehow preserving American values, but thatâs the point: the âpresidentâsâ apologists arenât sensible people to begin with
7 Likes
Notably, no one addressed my point, and instead used dinosaur juice and warmed the climate to argue my precise usage of words, which is probably the least effective way to change any hearts or minds.
Frankly, if my shitty terminology makes me sound like a âmouth-breathing right-wing xenophobeâ, I probably have more chance of reaching the Great Wall of Gina followers than a whole bunch of self-pleasuring terminology police who high five each other with smug smiles, while missing the whole point of the comment.
But point taken, and no offense to you in particular.
I do agree with your point, so there was no particular reason to address it. What more would you have wanted?
1 Like
If it hasnât been for the terminology Iâd have agreed with a Like or more, as Iâm sure others would have. When this topic comes up Iâm usually quick to point out that going after just a handful of employers with harsh prison sentences and fines would dry up demand for undocumented labour quickly. As we agree, that would be a more efficient solution than the current nonsense involving walls and locking up kids (not that I expect mouth-breathing right-wing xenophobes to ever support going after the white job creators they worship).
Your unfortunate choice of terminology, however, undermined your main point â not because youâre violating some smug PC rule but because using the term muddied the consistency of your own message. Itâs like someone saying âI support equal rights for them thar n*ggers.â
9 Likes
âICEâ cream?
ha no
Well, itâs not quite like that, as nobody is losing their job over following some UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANT to his apartment, saying âillegalsâ, but I get ya.
2 Likes
Fill in whatever word you like. Call them fnerdblochs for all I care. Try to understand the message instead of getting all caught up in what specific term is politically correct at the moment.
In a word, yes.
FTA:
An average of 84% of Republicans say they approve of Trumpâs job performance, compared with an average of just 7% of Democrats, according to Pew Research Center data collected over the past year and a half. This 77-percentage-point gap is even larger than the partisan divides seen in average ratings of Obama (67 points) and Bush (58 points) during their presidencies.
2 Likes
Not a problem if you have the pull to get them a H-2B visa.
2 Likes
Actually, no. The language is part and parcel with the dehumanization and âother-ingâ of our fellow human beings. What part of this do you not understand?
10 Likes
Perhaps he thinks that the doctrine of free speech exempts one from the consequences of said speech. That seems to be a persistent misunderstanding of how it works.
For example, if one wants oneâs statement be taken seriously by serious people one might not want to suffer the consequences of using terminology currently associated with profoundly unserious people. To his credit sluggo has said he takes this point.
3 Likes
I do not accept your assertion. Whatever word is used, it will come to represent exactly what you donât want soon enough, and in the mean time, the point is lost.
What part of THAT do you not understand?
Cmon, thatâs as ridiculous as prosecuting the Johns instead of the hookers. REAL people could get hurt! /s
