It's also a strawman to say that Trump's not a racist because Islam isn't a race. He's racist for many other reasons.
That isn't how logic works. The person making the claim provides the evidence and the logic. If the claimant doesn't provide good evidence, the person pointing out the flaws hasn't done anything wrong by not re-making the case for the claimant.It's also a strawman to say that Trump's not a racist because Islam isn't a race. He's racist for many other reasons.
I was just defaming you, for once again posting ignorance about US politics, media, and political factions, that you were corrected on months ago.No. But feel free to defame your political enemies after losing this election, if that gives you some sort of relief.
That may be within reason a fair description of the vote, actually. Not the motive of it, but a reasonable description of the situation.That doesn't have anything to do with what you were responding to unless you are saying that exactly everyone who voted against him thinks he's racist and exactly everyone who voted for him thinks he's not.
[...] It seems to me that one of the factors which brought down Hillary is that people are already tired by leftist - political correctness - pro immigration - gender - positive discrimination - false racist accusations - LGBTI - propaganda shoved down their throats every single day from 90% of "mainstream" media, scores of leftist activists and "standard" politicians. [...].
He also claimed that the election process was rigged.Donald Trump complained repeatedly that many of the polls were biased against him.
No, but it is a backlash against being called a racist for things like "micro-aggressions". The word racism has been thrown around so much people are sick to death of it.Yes. It looks like there has been something of a backlash by people wanting to assert their racism, religious bigotry, sexism and xenophobia. Trump has re-legitimised the free expression of such things in the public sphere.
Certainly this had something to do with it. Obama seemed more concerned with stirring up racial animus and dictating which bathrooms people used rather than dealing with important issues.I suspect that the election of Trump might have more to do with people feeling left out of the American dream, though - that feeling that the government is not doing anything for them, but is serving other interests. Whether Trump can, in fact, do anything to address those issues, is something that remains to be seen. He has a very hard road ahead of him.
The question of what went wrong with the polls is an interesting one, if indeed they got it wrong. My own suspicion is that a Trump win was probably within the margin of error on most of the polls taken just prior to the election.538.com said this was mostly correct.
To understand this you need to ask yourself where are major newspapers located. In big cities. Big cities in the U.S. are islands of left wing politics in a sea of conservatives. I live in a medium sized city, and almost everyone I know was for Trump. Conversely, in the areas where major newspapers are located, everyone is a left winger. Voting for Trump seemed inconceivable to them, just as voting for Obama in 2012 was inconceivable to those of us not in big cities. I was shocked when Obama was re-elected. Almost no one I knew voted for him.It's no wonder that Trump supporters hate the media, though. With 500 newspaper endorsements across the country for Clinton compared to 25 for Trump, you have to come up with some reason why they'd do that. Possibilities: (1) newspaper editors are all idiots; (2) there's a grand conspiracy of "the media" to try to rig the election; (3) editors are all tree-hugging lefty communists; (4) there was some other good reason to prefer Clinton over Trump. Since the answer couldn't possibly be (4), the other options are obviously the most likely.
Not likely.Y'all have fun with that. Let's hope Trump lives up to all your hopes and actually delivers meaningful results for the disgruntled. Let's hope that a year or so into his Presidency the people who voted for him aren't regretting it and wishing they listened to the stupid liberal editors.
If visible minorities in the USA will be treated the way that Trump has treated them and the way that his supporters want to treat them, then these people have little use for the democracy of the USA. They may respond as people do when democracies fail.
Yeah, Trump is pretty much a white Rosa Parks.The word racism has been thrown around so much people are sick to death of it.
I'm not convinced that there was any kind of conspiracy. Fox and Rasmussen are pollsters associated with the Republicans, and they had Clinton ahead. But something obviously went wrong with the pollsters' sampling methods.
I think you have that backwards. Republicans in North Carolina dictated which bathrooms people could use. Obama said "people can figure it out on their own."Obama seemed more concerned with stirring up racial animus and dictating which bathrooms people used rather than dealing with important issues.
Certainly this had something to do with it. Obama seemed more concerned with stirring up racial animus and dictating which bathrooms people used rather than dealing with important issues.
You need to be a bit careful there, as "bias" has a scientific meaning that applies here. A systemic error is a bias in the data.Donald Trump complained repeatedly that many of the polls were biased against him....
I'm not convinced that there was any kind of conspiracy. Fox and Rasmussen are pollsters associated with the Republicans, and they had Clinton ahead.
But something obviously went wrong with the pollsters' sampling methods.
Several of those answers are not mutually exclusive and a more rationally worded version of #3 is certainly true along with others..
It's no wonder that Trump supporters hate the media, though. With 500 newspaper endorsements across the country for Clinton compared to 25 for Trump, you have to come up with some reason why they'd do that. Possibilities: (1) newspaper editors are all idiots; (2) there's a grand conspiracy of "the media" to try to rig the election; (3) editors are all tree-hugging lefty communists; (4) there was some other good reason to prefer Clinton over Trump. Since the answer couldn't possibly be (4), the other options are obviously the most likely....
Let's hope that a year or so into his Presidency the people who voted for him aren't regretting it and wishing they listened to the stupid liberal editors.
That wasn't the issue with that "calibration" - the exit poll data was "re-calibrated" to match the machine count, not assumptions about who had and had not voted, been polled, etc.The calibration issue came to the forefront in 2000 and/or 2004 (can't remember exactly) with the conspiracy theories about Bush stealing the election(s). People misundersood the re-calibrating of the exit poll data as an attempt to hide a rigged election, assuming incorrectly that exit polls stand on their own, when in fact they do not.
No, it isn't. Newspaper editors do tend to be liberal, but not particularly leftist, and no more so than equivalently educated and informed people in general.Several of those answers are not mutually exclusive and a more rationally worded version of #3 is certainly true along with others.
You again post fiction directly contradicted by easily found physical fact. Why is this dependence on fictional accounts so strongly correlated with Republican Party voting in general and support for Trump in particular?Certainly this had something to do with it. Obama seemed more concerned with stirring up racial animus and dictating which bathrooms people used rather than dealing with important issues.
Considering the nonstop slamming of Trump and his supporters in the media as the scum of the earth and "a basket of deplorables", I think the "shy Trump voter" theory is quite reasonable. Many Trump supporters may have been too embarrassed to admit to pollsters that they were voting for Trump.The leading theory I've seen is that Republicans don't trust pollsters and so don't respond or respond to them accurately.
What total proportion/percentage of Muslims in the world would be terrorists, in your opinion?I have newer written, that all Muslims are terrorists and also Im pretty sure that Trump never did say anything like it. You are trying straw man fallacy asserting something I have never written.
And regarding Muslims and terrorism, there are many leftist propaganda rigged statistics desperately trying to show that Muslims are not majority of terrorists, but real statistics not including for example pet activists broking a window, would clearly show that Muslims are easily majority of terrorists in last 15 years causing the biggest human toll.